Nevada Mother of the Year, 1978

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at|http: //books .google .com/I

,♦

"0

V

Ut^

610

COMPLETE COLLECTION

OF

0

State Trials

AND

PROCEEDINGS FOR HIGH TREASON AND OTHER

CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS

FROM THE

EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1783,
WITH KOTES AJfD OTHER ILLVSTRATIOXS :

COMPUBO BT

T. B. HOWELL, Esq. F.R.S. F.S.A.

AND

CONTINUED

FROM THE YE Aft 1783 TO THE PRESENT TIME:

BY

THOMAS JONES HOWELL, Esq.

VOL. XXVI.

[BEING VOL. V, OF THE CONTINUATION]
36— S8 GEORGE III A. D. 1796—1798.

L O N D O N:

FrbUid by T. C Hamard, PeUrhcnugh^urt, FUetStnei :

FOR 1X>NGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, ahd BROWN ; J. M. RICHARDSON ;
BLACK, KINGSBURY, PARBURY,. a»d ALLEN ; BALDWIN, CRADOCK,
▲VD JOY ; IL JEFFERY ; J. HATCHARD ; R. H. EVANS ; J. BOOKER ;
J. BOOTH ; HUDD avd CALKIN ; AND T. C. HANSilRD.

1819.

■^ - .•

.' -^v

SB
lA.M

\

in-)-

,/' /

/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TO

VOLUBfE XXVI.

GEORGE THE THIRD, A. D. 1796—1798.

Page

61 1. PsOCESDINeS on (be Trial of ROBERT THOMAS tfROSS-

HELD fo9 High TireasoD ; at die Sesiioin House in the Old
Btakf^ on Wednesday die mitt and Thunday the I2lh Days of -
Mi^: 36 GaoiteE III. a. d. 1796 1

PRQCEEDINjGS on the trials of the DEFENDBftS.

612. Trial of JAMES WELDON for High Treason,, before the Coint

holden under a Commission of Oyer and Terminer and General
Gaol Delivery in and for the County of the City of Dublin, in the
Kingdom of Ireland, on Monday December 2l8t and Tuesday
December 22nd : 36 Georgb III. a. d. 1795 .* .*..... 225

613. Proceedings on the Trial of MICHAEL MAGUIRE for Hi^h

TVeason, before the Court holden under a Commission of Oyer
and Terminer at DubUn, on Thursday December 24 : 56 Gborgc
HL A.D, 1795. 293

614. Proceedings on the Trial of JOHK LEARY for High Treason,

before the Court holden under a Commission of Oyer and Terminer

at Dublin, on Monday December 28th : 86 Gboros III. a. d. 1795 295

615. Proceedings on the Trial of THOx^AS KENNEDY for High

Tkeason ; l^efore the Court Holden at Dublin under a Commission
ef Oyer and Terminer, on Monday February 22 : 96 George III.
A. »; n96,,; .•..;•...• ....r...MM».M... 353

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Pag€
6 J 6. Proceedioga on th« Trial of PATRICK HART, for High Treason^

befort the Court holdeo under a Commission of Oyer and Termi-

»

net at Dublin, on Wednesday February 2ith : S6 Gkorgk III.
A.D. 1796 .'. 387

017. Proceedings on the Trial of ANDREW GLENNAN, PHILIP
KANE, OWEN REILY, CHARLES SORAGHAN, PA-
TRICK KINSHELA, MICHAEL SLEAVEN, JOHN CON-
NOR, HUGH BYRNE, MICHAEL WALSH, JOHN RATI-
CAN, JAMES CARMICHAEL, JAMES CONNOR, and
JAMES DEMPSEY, for a Conspiracy, before the Court
holden under a Commission of Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on
Monday February 22nd: S6 George III. a. d. 1796 437

618* Proceedings on the Trial of the Right Reverend Father in God,
JOHN IWarren} LORD BISHOP OF BANGOR; HUGH
OWEN, D. D. JOHN ROBERTS, and John WILLIAMS,
Clerks ; and THOMAS JONES, Gentleman, for a Riot ; tried
by a Special Jury, before the Honourable John Heath, Esq. one
of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas, at the Assizes
holden at Shrewsbury on the 26th day of July : S6 George III.
A.D. 1796 • 463

619* Proceedings on the Trial of an Information exhibited Ex-Officio by
his Majesty's Attorney General (in pursuance of an Address pre-
sented to his Majesty by the House of Conunons) against JOHN
REEVES, Esquire, for a Seditious Libel ; tried at Guildhall, by
a Special Jury, before the Right Hon. Lloyd Lord Kenyon, Lord
Chief Justice of the Court of KingVBeuch, May 20th : S6 Geo.
in. A.D. 1796 [Now first published] 529

620. Trial of JOHN BINNS on an Indictment for Seditious Words ;
tried at Warwick before the Honourable Sir William Henry Ash*
hurst, Knight, one of the Justices of his Majesty's Court of King's*
Bench, on Tuesday, August 15th : S7 George UI. a. o. 1797... 595

6S1. Proceedings against THOMAS WILLIAMS for publishing Paine's
«< Age of Reason ;*' tried by a Special Jury in the Court of King's*
Bench at Westminster, before the Right Honourable Lloyd Lord
Kenyon on the 24th day of June : S7 George III. a. d. 1797
[Now first published] 653

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Pag9

6SB. Trid of DAVID MACLANE for High Treason ; befort iht Court

bolden under a Special CommiMioii of Oyer and Tennioer, at the
City of Quebec in the Province of Lower Canada, on Friday the
7th day of July : S7 George UL a. d. 1797 • 721

623« Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh against
ALISON DUNCAN, NEIL REIDPATH, and ROBERT
MITCHELL, on an Indictment charging them with Mobbing
and Rioting in resistance of the execution of the Militia Act, 11th
and 12th of October: 37 George UL a. d. 1797 [Now first
published] 827

684. Proceedings, on the Trial of JAMES DUNN for conspiring to
Murder the Right Honourable Henry Lawes Luttrell, Earl of
Carhampton ; tried before the Court holden under a Commission
of Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on Monday October 29rd:

37 George IIL a. d. 1797 839

624.* Proceedings on the Trial of PATRICK CARTY for conspiring to
Murder the Right Honourable Henry Lawes Luttrell, Earl of

»

Carhampton ; tried before the Court holden under a Commission
of Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on Wednesday October 25th :

38 Gborob IIL a.o. 1797 877

695. Proceedings on the Trial of PETER FINERTY, upon an Indict-
ment for a Seditious Libel ; tried at Dublin before the Honourable
William Downes, one of the Justices of his Majesty's Court of
King's Bench in Ireland, on Friday December 22nd : 38 Geo. Ill
a. d. 1797 901

6S6. Proceedings on the Trial of PATRICK FINNEY for High Trea-
son; tried at Dublin before the Right Honourable Tankerville
Chamberlain, one of the Justices of the Court of King's Bench,
and the Honourable Michael Smith, one of the Barons of the
Court of Exchequer of the Kingdom of Ireland, on Tuesday
January 16th : S8 George UL a. d. 1798 1019

pB7. Probeedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, against
GEORGE MEALM AKER, on an Indictment charging him with
Sedition and admim'stering unlawful Oaths, 10th, 11th, and 12th
of January : 38 Gsorgx HI. a. p. 179^ [Now first published]... 11S5

TABLB OF CONTfiNtS.

Page

626. Proceedii^ id th« High Coort of Justiciary $X Ediokurght agtiMl
ANGUS CAMERON and JAMES MBNZIES for Sedition,
Mobbing^ and BJoting, January ISdi and ITA: SSGioegb III.
A.D. 1798 [Now first pubbbod] 1)65

629. IVocoedingi befi»o Iho Circuit Court of Justiciary holdaa at Pertii,
f«8in$t DAVID BLACK and JAMES PATBBSON, for Sadl-
tion and adninislering nnlawfol OMbs, Sept. flOtfc : S8 Giomb ni.
A.P. 1798 [Now fint pobSshed} 1179

63a

Note.

Proceedingp on tbe Trial of JAMES O'COIGLY, otherwise oaUed
JAMES QUIGLEY, otherwise called JAMES JOHN FIVEY,
ARTHUR O'CONNOR, Esq., JOHN BINNS, JOHN ALLEN,
and JEREMIAH LEARY, on aa Indietnent, charging them
with High Treason ; tried befose the Court holdea under a Special
Coaomission at Maidstone in Kent, on Mondsy the 2lst aad Tues-
day the 22Dd days of May : 38 Gxobob HI. a, d. 1798 ..*««...••*• 1191

In consequence of the great length of ihii Trial, the present Volume only '
contains thejurst dmfs Proc^eimgs and Mr. Pbmer's Speoehjbr the
Prisoners on the second dajf : the remainder of thn Case wiU beinserted
at the beginning of Volume XXV IL

■ ^ I t^-^r^m^m

£ R & A T A.

p. 8, 1. 10, after Pleas, insert and a judge of the Court of RingVbench.

p. 15,.IL xa& SV/sr of theestmeidmiynatttrfl^thei MoiAlheeJBtBBasdiaaiyAaturB

of the
p. 6^ 1. afl^jim thev need Uk
p. 104y 1. 9y fjar that, reod the.
p. l(^y 1. 19, efier this, insert witness.

p. llVk P/ns»6s<iiSN^ author, rssdairthorilr.

p. ISO, I. 93, /or passed, rvod pass.

1^ isa, \.\%f<m regsids, reedFregsided.

p. 140, 1. 17 from h<ittom^ the words Do you know, &c. ikould commence a nem line,

p. 149, 1. 5, for Crossfield that, read Crossfield; that.

p. 708^UlO,jlSrcnisl coDcAide^ restferuel'terCDndudte.

p. 790, ]. 31, /or a of, read of a.

• . • r

• »

t

STATE TRIALS,

611. Proceedings on the Trial of Robert Thomas Cboss->
FIELD for High Treason; at the Sessions House in the
Old Bailey, on Wednesday the 11th and Thursday the
12th Day of May: 36 Gkorge HI. a. d. 1796.*

On the 31st of August, 1795, Robert
Thomas Crossfield was apprehended at
Fowey Id Cornwall, sent up to London,
and was committed hy the privy council
to the Tower.

On the 14th of January, 1790, the Grand
Jury for the city of London, sitting at
the Sessions-house in th^ Old Bailey,
returned a. true bill against Robert
Thomas Crossfield, Paul Thomas Lc
Maltrc, John Smith and George Higgins,
for high treason.

On the Idth of January, Paul Thomas Lc
Maitrc, John Smith, and George Iliggins
surrendered themselves in court, and
were committed to Newgate.

On the 20th of January, Mr. Gurncy was
assigned by the Court, of counsel fur
Paiu Thomas Le Maitre, John Smith,
and George Uiggins.

On the I6th of February, Mr. Wbiic, so-
licitor to the Treasury, delivered tu each
of the prisoners a copy of the indictment,
a Ibt of t^ie jurors impannellcd by the
sheriffs, and a list of the witnesses to be
produced by the crown, for proving the
said indictment.

On the 17th of February, Mr. Adam was
assigned by the Court, of cmmsel for
Paul Thomas Le Maitre, John Smith,
and George Iligjrins.

On this 20th of February, Mr. Adam, and
Mr. Gurney were assigned of counsel for
Robert Thomas Crossfield.

On tl)e 5th of April, Robert Thomas Cross-
field was removed by Habeas Corpus
from the Tower to Newgate.

At the session, on the Cth of April, the
prisoners were arraiuied on the follow-
ing indictment, and sevesaily pleaded

' Not Guilty.

• Taken in short- hand by Joseph Gurney.
VOL. XXVI.

Caption.*-* Loii(fon.

At the general session of oyer and ter-
miner of our lord the king holden for the
city of London at Justice Hall in the
Old Bailey within the parish of Saint
Sepulchre in the ward of, Farringdon
without in London aforesaid on Weanes-
day the thirteenth day of January in the
thirty-sixth year of the reign of our so •
vereign lord* George the third king of
Great Britain &c. before William Curtis
esijuire mayor of the city ef London sir
Archibald Macdonald knight chief baron
of our said lord the king of his court of
exchequer John Heath e»quire one of
the justices of our said lord the king of
his court of Common Pleas Sir Alex-
ander Thompson knight one of the ba-
rons of our said lord Uic king of his said
Court of Exchcnuor Richird Clarke
esquire William Pickett esquire Paul Le
Mesurier csq.uirG Stephen Langbloii es-
quire aldermen of the said city John
Silvester esquire and others their fellow
justices of our said lord the king assigned
by letters patent of our said lord the
king made under the great seal of our
saia lord the king of Great Britain To
the same justices above named and others

' or any two or more of them directed to
inquire more fully the trutii by the oatli
of good and lawful men of. the city of
London and by other ways means and
methods by which they shall or may bet-
ter know as well within liberties as with-
out by whom the truth of the matter
may be better known of all treasons
misprisions of treason insurrections rebel-
lions counterfei tings clippings washings
false coinings andother falsitiesof the mo-
ney of Great Britain and other kingdoms
or dominions whatsoever and of all mur*

B

TT

M
,1

3J

S6 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomas Crossfield

[4

thers felonies manslaughters killings burg-
laries rapes of women unlawful meetings
eonventicles unlawfu 1 uttering of words as-
semblies misprisionsconfederacies false al-
legations trespasses riots routs retentions
escapes contempts fitlsities negligences
concealments maintenances oppressions
champartys deceipts and all other evil
doings offences and injuries whatsoever
and also the accessaries of them within
the city aforesaid (as well within liberties
as without) by whomsoever and in what
manner soever done committed or perpe-
trated and by whom or to whom when
how and after what manner and of
all other articles and circumstances con-
cerning the premises and every of them
or any of them in any manner whatso-
ever and the said treasons and other the
premises to hear and determine accord-
ing to the laws and customs of England
by the oath of Henry Rutt William
Arthur Adam Dennis William Hunter
Thomas Knott Joshua Knowles Alex-
ander Lean Thomas Ayres John Tombs
Charles Aldridge John Guy Thomas
Felbws James Slatfbrd John Back
€harle3 Scholfield Joseph Aldridge and
William Kine good ana lawful men of
the said city now here sworn and charged
to inquire for our said lord the king for
the body of tke said city It is presented
in manner and form following (that is to
say)

Indictment. — LmuUm to tok.

The jurors for our lord the king upon their
oath pesent that Robert Tliomas Cross-
field late of London gentleman Paul
lliomas Le Maitre late of the narish of
Saint Ann Soho in the county of^Middle-
sex watch case maker John Smith late of
Westminster in the county of Middlesex
aforesaid bookseller and George Higgins
late of London druggist being subjects of
our said lord the krog not having the fear
•fGod in their hearts nor weigning the
duty of their allegiance but being moved
and seduced by the in8ti|ation of the
devil as false traitors agamst our said
lord the king their supreme true lawful
and undoubted lord and wholly withdraw-
ing the cordial love and true and due obe-
dience which every true and faithful sub-
ject of our said lord the king should and
of right ought to bear towards our said
lord ue kins on the first day of Septcm«
ber in the thirty-fourth year of the reign
of our sovereign lord George the third
by the grace of God king of Great Bri-
tain France and Ireland Defender of the
Faith &c. and on divers other days and
times as well before as after at London
aforesaid ^to wit) in the parish of Saint
Dunstan m the West m the ward of
Farrin^don without maliciously and trai-
torously with force and arms &«. did

compass imagine and intend to bring
and put our said lord the king to death.
;' "^ nd to fulfil perfect and bring to effect their
' '^ most evil and wicked treason and trea-
sonable compassing and imagination
aforesaid they the said Robert Thomas
Crossfield Paul Thomas Le Maitre John
Smith and George Higgins as such false
traitors as aforesaid on the said first day
of September in the thirty-fourth year
aforesaid and on divers other days and
times as well before as after at London
aforesaid in the parish-of Saint Dunstao'
aforesaid and ward aforesaid did together
with divers other false traitors whose
names are to the said jurors unknown
with force and arms maliciously and trai*
toronsly conspire combine consult consent
and agree to procure make and provide
and caused to l>e procured made and
provided a certain instrument for the
purpose of discharging an arrow and also
a certain arrow to be charged and loaded
with poison with intent to discharge and
cause to be dischai^ed the said arrow so
charged and loaded with poison firom and
out of and by means of the said instrl^-
ment at and against the person of our
said lord the king, and thereby and there-
with to kill and put to death our said
lord the king.
And farther to fulfil perf^t and bring to
, effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagi-
nation aforesaid they the said Robert
Thomas Crossfield Paul Thomas Le
Maitre John Smith and George Higgins
as such false traitors as aforesaid on the
said first day of September in the thirty-
fourth year aforesaid at London aforesaid
in the parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid
in the ward aforesaid with force and
anns maliciously and traitorously did em-
ploy and engage and cause to be employed
and engaged one John Hill to make and
fashion divers (to wit) two pieces of wood
to be used as models fox the making and
forming certain parts of the said instru-
ment from and out of and b^ means of
which the said arrow was so mtended to
be discharged at and against the person
of our said lord the king as aforesaid for
the traitorous purpose aforesaid and did
then and there deliver and cause to be de*
livered to the said John Hill a certain
paper with certain drawings thereon
drawn and designed as instructions aad
:tirections for making such models.
And further to fulfil perfect and bring to ef-
fect then* most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagina-
tion aforesaid they the said Robert
Thomas Crossfield Paul Thomas I>
Maitre John Smith and Geor^ Higgins
as such false traitors as aforesaid on tho
said first day of September in the thirty-
Iburth year aforessud and on diyera other

X

*J

far High Treasofu

A. D. 17^6.

c«

dajys «nd tioies as well before as af\er
with force and arms at London aforesaid
in the parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid
and ward aforesaid did meet consult nad
deliberate among themseWes and 'oge-
4her with divers other false traitors whose
names are to the said jurors unknown of
and concerning tbeir said intended trai-
tocous killing and putting to death of our
said lord the king by the means and in-
^Intment aforesaid and how and where
such killing and putting to death might I
be niost x^ily and euectuaHy accom-
plished.

And fbrther %o ililfil perfect and bring to ef-
fect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagi-
aatioB aforesaid they the said Robert
Thomas Cros^ld Paul Thomas Le
liailre Jolm Smith and George Higgins
as such false traitors as aforesaid on the
said first day of September in the thirty-
fourth year aforesaid at London aforesaid
in the parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid
and ward aforesaid with force and arms
maliciously and traitorously did employ
4md ensage and cause to be employed and
engij^ one Thomas Upton to assist in
mucm^ the said instrument from and
out of and by means of which the said
srrow was so intended to be discharged at
mad against the person of our said lord
the king as aforesaid for the traitorous pur-
pose aroresaid and did then and there for
that purpose deliver and cause to be de-
livered to the said Thomas Upton a cer-
tain paper with certain figures and draw-
ings thereon drawn and designed as in-
structions and directions for making such
instrument and also certain pieces to wit
two pieces of wood as models for the
aiaking and forming certain parts of the
saki instrument

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effisct their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagi-
natioD aforesaid they the said Robert
Thomas Crossfield Paul Thomas Le
Maitre John Smith and George Higgins
as such false traitors as sibresaid on the
said first day of September in the thirty-
fourth year aforesaid at London aforesaid
in the parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid
and ward aforesaid with force and arms
oalidously and traitorously did deliver
and cause to be delivered to the said
Thomas Upton a certain metal tube to be
used by him the said Thomas Upton
in the making and forming of the said
instrument from and out of and by means
of which the said arrow was so intended
to be discharged at and agsunst the per-
aoD of our said lord the king as aforesaid
for the traitorous purpose aforesaid and
as a part of such instrument

And farther to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their mos( evil and wicked treason I

and treasonable compassing and tmagi*
nation aforesaid they the saki Robert
Tliomas Crossfield Paul Thomas Le
Maitre John Smith and Greorge Hig^ns
as such false traitors as aforesaid on the
said first day of September in the thirty-
fourth year aforesaid and no divers other
days and times as well before as after at
London aforesakl in the parish of Saint
Dunstan aforesaid and ward aforesaid did
together witli divers others folse traitors
whose names are to the said jurors un-
known with force and arms maliciously
and traitorously conspire combine consult
consent and agree to procure make and
provide and cause to be procured made
and provided a certain otner instrument
with intent thereby and therewith and
by means thereof to kill and put to death
our said lord the king

And further to folfil p«foct and bring to
effect their most «vil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagi-
nation aforesaid they the said Robert
Thomas Crossfield PaulThomas Le Maitre
John Smith and Gedrge Higgins as such
false traitors as aforesaid on the said first
day of September in the thirty-fourth year
aforesaid at London aforesaid in the parish
of Saint Dunstan aforesaid in U^ ward
aforesaid with force and arras maliciously
and traitorously did employ and engage
and cause to be employed and ensaged
one John Hill to make and fash ion'di vers
to wit two pieces of wood to be used as
models for the making and forming cer-
tain parts of the said last mentioned in-
strument for the traitorous purpose last
aforesaid and did then and there delivel
and cause to be delivered to the said John
Hill a certain other paper with certain
drawings thereon drawn and designed as
itistnictions and directions for making
such models

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagi-
nation aforesaid they the said Robert
I'homas Crossfield PaulThomas Le Maitre
J<^ Smith and George Higgins as such
false traitors as aforesaid on the said first
day of September in the thirty- fourth year
aforesaid and on divers other days aud
times as well before as after with force
and arms at London aforesaid in the
parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid and
ward aforesaid did meet consult and deli-
berate among themselves and together
with divers other false traitors whose
names are to the said jurors unknown of
and concerning their said intended trai-
torous killing and putting to death of our
said lord the king by the means and
instrument last aforesaid and how and
where such killing and putthig to death
might be most readily and effectually ac-
complished

7}

S6 GEOROB III.

Trial ofHeibert Thmaos Crotsfield

[8

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compasshig and imagi-
nation aforesaid they the" said Robert
Thomas Crossfield Paul Thomas Le
Maitre John Smith and George Higgins
as such false traitors as aforesaid on the
said first day of September in the thirty-
fourth year aforesaid at London aforesaid
in the parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid
and ward aforesaid with force and arms
maliciously and traitorously did employ
and engage and cause to be employed
and engaged one Thomas Upton to assist
in making the said last mentioned in-
-strument for the traitorous purpose last
aforesaid and did then and there for that
purpose deliver and cause to be delivered
to tne said Thomas Upton a<:ertain other
paper with certain figures and drawings
thereon drawn and designed as instruc-
tions and directions for making such last
mentioned instrument and also certain
pieces to wit two pieces of wood as mo-
dels for the making and forming certain
parts of the said last mentioned instru-
ment

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagi-
nation aforesaid they 'the said Robert
Thomas Crossfield PaulThomas Le Maitre
John Smith and George Higgins as such
false traitors as aforesaid on the said first
day of September in the thirty-fourth
year aforesaid at London aforesaid in the
parish of Saint Dunstan aforesaid and
•ward aforesaid with force and arms mali-
ciously and traitorously did deliver and
•cause to be delivered to the said Thomas
Upton a certain metal tube to be used by
him the said Thomas Upton in the
fnaking and forming of the said last
mentioned instrument for the traitorous
purpose last aforesaid and as a part of
such last mentioned instrument against
the duty of the allegiance of them the
the said Robert Thomas Crossfield Paul
Thomas Le Maitre John Smith and
George Higgins against the peace of our
said lord the king his crown and dignity
and against the form of the statute in
that case made and provided.

[It appearing to the Court that the proper
officer bad not summoned the jury in
time for the prisoners to take their trial
at the present session, the trial was post-
poned to the next session.]

Setsions House in the Old Bailey, — Wednesday,
May the ntlt, 17'9C,

Present, Lord Chief Justice Eyre ; Mr, Jus-
tice Grose; Mr. Recorder; and others his
Majesty's Justices, &c.

Counsel for the Crown.—Mr. Attorn^ Ge-
neral £Sir John Scolt^ aflerwards Lord Chan-

cellor Eldon"] ; Mr. Solicitor Oenertd [Sir Joh«
Mitford, afterwards I/)rd Redesdale and Lord
Chancellor of Ireland] ; Mr. Law (afterwards
Lord EUenborough, and Lord ChieT Justice of
the Court of lung's Bench]; Mr. Garrou
[afterwards a Baron of the Court of Exche-
quer] ; Mr. Wood [afterwards a Baron of the
Court of Exchequer]; Mr. Fielding; — Mr.
Abbott [afterwards, successively^ a Judge of toe
Court of Common Pleas, and now (1818) Lord
Chief Justice of the Court of Ring^s Bench.]
Solicitor.^ Joseith \^hite, esq. SoHcitor to
the Board of Treasury.

Counsel Assigned for the Prisoner, — Mr.
Adam [afterwards Lord Chief Commissioner
of the Jury Court, and a Baron of the
Court of Exchequer of Scotland]; Mr.
Gurney,

Assistant Counsel for the Prifoner.— >Mr.
Moore; Mr. Mackintosh [afterwards Recorder
of Bombay.]

Solicitors for the Prisoner,

Messrs. Foulkes and Cooke, Hart street,
Bloomsbury square.

The Attorney General said, that as he un-
derstood the prisoners meant to separate their
challenges, he proposed to proceed to the
trial of Crossfield first. '

Robert Thomas Cros^eld set to the bar.

[Mr. Shelton, the Clerk of the Arraigns, called
over the Panel.]

Hilton Wray, esq. challenged by the prisoner.

John Anderson, merchant, not a freeholder ia
the city of London to the value of 10/. a
year.

John Vincent Gandolfi, merchant, challenged
by the prisoner.

Thomas Dunnage, merchant, excused on ac-
count of age.

Peter Pope, esq. excused on account of age.

Abraham Favene, merchant^ excused on ac-
count of illness.

John Naylor, merchant, challenged by the
prisoner.

Joseph Norville, merchant, not a freeholder.

David Jones, merchant, challenged by the
crown.

Thomas Latham, merchant, not properly
described in the panel.

John Mair, merchant, not a freeholder.

Sir Walter Rawlinson, banker, excused on
account of illness.

John Henry Schneider, njercfaant, challenged
by the prisoner.

Claude Scott, com- factor, challenged by the
prisoner.

Rowland Stephenson, banker, excused on ac-
count of deafness.

James Atkinson, merchant, challenged by the
prisoner.

Richard Heatley, merchant, not a freeholder. "

Duncan Hunter, merchant, challenged by the
crown.

William Axe, stock-brokefi "not properly
described in the panel.

9]

Jot High Treasofu

A. D. 1796.

[10

WilliaTn Artnand, merchant, not properly

described in the pane!.
John Greenside, corn fector, sworn.
William Ward^ coal- factor, chaUenged by the

crown.
John Prestwidge, bop-merchant, not a fret-

holder.
Thomas Fothergill, corn-factor, challenged by

the prisoner.
Henry Foudrinier, stationer^ challenged by

the prisoner.
Francis Barstow Nixon, merchant, sworn.
Nathaniel Brassey, banker, excused on ac-
count of illness.
William Morley, sen. corn-factor, not a house-
holder in the city of London.
Lewis Tessicr, merchant, challenged by the

prisoner.
3onnBead, coal-factor, not a householder.
Robert Reeve^ corn-factor, challenged by the

crown.
Pa«i Abutter, esq. excused on account of age.
James Brander, merchant not a freeholder.
Samuel Brandram, mercliant, challenged by

the prisoner.
Charles Uamerton, esq. not properly described

in the panel.
WiJiiam Uallier, merchant, challenged by the

pisoner.
Jonn Willis, gentleman, excused on account

of illness.
William Walker, sugar baker, sworn.
David Pugh, grocer, not a freeholder.
Edward Sjraeon, merchant, challenged by the

prisoner.
Henry Stokes, merchant, not a householder.
Percival North, grocer, challenged by the

crown.
Richard Lawrence, sugar baker, not a free-
holder.
Henry Mittbn,'bamkcT, not a householder.
Henry Turner, merchant, challenge<i by the

prisoner.
Edward Brbcksopp, corn-factor, challenged

by ihfe prisoner.
Alexander Black, merchant, sworn,
William Robinson, merchant, challenged by

the prisoner.
William Shone, wine merchant, sworn.
Daniel Shirley, wine merchant, not a free-
holder.
John Garratt, tea-broker, challenged by the

prisoner.
Thomas Higgihs, grocer not a freeholder.
John Hemmet, banker, challenged by the

prisoner.
William M^Andrew. orange merchant, not

properly describea in the panel.
James Bell, sugar baker, not a freeholder.
Miles Stringer, spice merchant, excused on

account of illness.
John Sherer, merchant, qjiallengcd by the

prisoner. '
Joseph Stonard, corn-factor, challenged by the

crown.
Samuel Ibbetson^ mercer, challenged by the
prisoner.

Henry Isherwood, paper-maker, not a free-
holder.
Windham KnatchbuH, not a householder.
William Ascough, undertaker, challenged by

the crown.
John Addison, linen draper, challenged by the.

prisoner.
Thomas Wright, soap-boiler, not properly,
described in the list delivered to the pri-
soner.
Arthur Windus, coachmaker, sworn.
Richard Clarke, coach-master, not properly

described in the panel.
William Purdy, broker, challenged by the

prisoner.
Eaward Penny, glorer, not a householder.
Michael Eaton, hosier, challenged by the

crown.
Timothy Fisher, linen-draper, not a house-
holder.
Edward Newberry, bricklayer, challenged by

the prisoner.
William Norris, mason, sworn.
Thomas Loveland, baker, challenged by the

prisoner.
William Lyncs, warehouseman, excused on

account of illness.
William Gosling, carpenter, sworn-
Benjamin Hanson, orange merchant, not a

freeholder.
James Tyers, sugarbroker, not a freeholder.
Henry Goldfinch, hatter, challenged by the

prisoner.
Henry Thomas Avery, currier, excused on ac-
count of illness.
Nicholas Browning, baker, challenged by the

prisoner.
John Blades, glassman, not a freeholder.
John Rowbuck, broker, not properly described

in the panel.
Edward Jackson, mans-merccr, not a free-
holder.
Joseph Warner, grocer, challenged by the

prisoner.
Thomas Whipham, silversmith, excused on

account of illness.
John Crutchfield, oilman, challenged by the

prisoner.
William Cnitchfield, oilman, challenged by

the prisoner.
Daniel Pinder, mason, sworn.
Henry Nettleship, gent, not a freeholder,
James Lyon, lighterman, challenged by the

prisoner.
William Leach, vintner, not properly described

in the panel.
John Turner, linen draper, challenged by the

prisoner.
William Humphreys, senior, grocer, challenged

by the prisoner.
Anthony Brown, fishbroker, excused on ac-
count of age.
Walter Brino, silversmith, excused on account

pf age
Christopher Smith, wine merchant, chal-
lenged by the crown.
Richard Fish^, haberdasher, nota freeholder.

11}

86 GEORGE III.

Trid qf Robert Thonuu Crottfidd

[18

Thomas Ovey, hatter, challenged by the

crown.
John Mackenzie, oilman, challenged hy the

prisoner. v

Thomas Jeffries, linen draper, one of the

people called Quakers.
William Parker, glassman, excused on account

of illness.
Thomas Abbott Green, silversmith, not a

freeholder.
Walter West, ironmonger, challenged by the

prisoner.
Benjamin White, bookseller, sworn.
Stephen Adams, silversmitli, excused on aG«

count of illness.
Andrew Abbott, potter, not a freeholder.
John Reid, distiller, swonun*
Pliillip Bundle, goldsmith, challenged by the

crown.
William Collier, gent, challenged by the pri-
soner.
John Coe, taylor, sworn.

The

John Greenside,
Fran.BorstowNixdn,
WUliam Walker,
Alexander Black,
William Shone,
Arthur Windus,

Jury.

William Norris,
William Gosling,
Daniel Pinder,
Benjamin White,
John Reid,
John Coe.

The Clerk of the Arraigns charged the
Jury with the Prisoner in the usual form.

The Indictment was opened by Mr. Abbott :

Mr. Attorney GeneralJ'-^M^y it please your
lordship, gentlemen of the Jury; In the
discharge of the very painful duty, which
belonjgs to the situation which I hold, I am
calleaupon this day to address you with
reference to a caee of a most serious nature,
whether it is considered with regard to the
public, or the prisoner who stands at the bar.
— Gentlemen, the indictment which you have
heard read charees the prisoner with the
highest offence known to the law of our
country, and it charges the prisoner with the
most aggravated species of that highest
offence.— It charges him with compassing
and imagining the death of the king, and
with havmg, for the purpose of carrying that
imagination into execution, prepared the
means of destroying the person of the sove-
reign.

Gentlemen I shall have very little occasion,
in the course of what I have to offer to your [
attention, to say much to you upon the law of
this particular case ; I shall state it to you in
the words of a great judge, a man attached
unquestionably to the genuine principles of
this constitution, whose name mts long been
revered and will continue to be revered whilst
the constitution of the country itself shall
endure — I mean the late Mr. Justice Foster —
He states the statute of the 95th Edward 3rd,
upon which this indictment is framed, and
whkb you probably will hear read and com-

mented upon by great modern living autho-
rities: he states the statute in these words —
** When a man doth compass or imagine
the death of our lord the king, and
thereof be upon sufficient proof attainted of
open deed by people of his own condition." —
lie states that in the case of the king, this
statute of S5th Edward 3rd, has with {^reat

Eropriety retained the rule that the will is to
e taken for the deed. With respect to homi-
cide in the case of individuals, the law of this
country once was, that even as to them the
will should be taken for the deed : that law
hath been altered in the case of private indi-
viduals ; but it remsuns unchanged with re-
spect to the sovereign of the counti^r, and the
reason why the law hath been continued, as
it anciently was, with respect to the king, is
stated in the book which I have been reading
to you, as follows : '' The principle upon which
this is founded is too obvious to need much
enlargement: the king is considered as the
head of the body politic, and the members of
that body are considered as united and kept
tcjgether by a political union with him, and
with each other : his life cannot in the ordi*
nary course of things be taken away by trea-
sonable practices without involving a whole
nation in blood and confusion : consequently
every stroke levelled at his person is, in the
ordinary course of things, levelled at the public
tranquillity. The law^ therefore, tendereth
the safety of the kins with an anxious concern,
and, if I may use the expression, with a con-
cern bordering upon jealousy. It considereth
the wicked imaginations of the heart to be of
the same degree of guilt as if carried into ac-
tual execution fipom the moment"-r(And I
would beg your attention, gentlemen, to this
passage :) ** From the moment that measureg
appear to htaie been taken to render them
effectual:'

Gentlemen, God alone can read the heart
of man : and the legislature has, therefore,
insisted upon this, in every trial between the
king and a prisoner indictod, that he Shall be
attainted ofopen deed by people of his con-
dition: that is to say, that some measures
shall be taken to e&ctuate that evil ima-

fination of the heart, some fact shall be
one or attempted to be done, in order to
prove to man's judgment that that concep-
tion and that imagination did enter into the
man's heart— This measure, proof of which
is made necessary by the law, is ordinarily
known by the name of an overt-act, and every
Indictment for treason, as you will hear, must
charge that the party compassed and imagined
the death of the king, and then it must sUte.
upon Uie face of it, those circumstances and
facts, which are the measures, by which the
prosecutor insists that the party has disclosed
that traitorous co&passing and imagination of

his hearL

Gentlemen, the present indictment specifies
several such overt-acts. With respect to many
of Uiem, conspiracy with others is of the es-

13]

for High Treason*

A. D. 1796.

[14

sence of th«in — with respect to many others
of them they are so framed that, if this Dri*
soner is alone guilty, the circumstance that
he is the sole person to whom, upon that sun-
position, guilt could he imputed will be no ob-
jection to his being found guilty, if the iustice
of the case, upon a due attention to the cir-
cumstances of the case before a jury of his
country, as affecting him alone, requires that
he shall be convicted. — I say that circuro-
stance — that he is, in this way of putting the
case, the only person guilty, will form no ob-
jection to his conviction.

Gentlemen, I state no more upon the law
of the case but to add a single wora to what I
have already mentioned, and that is this ob-
servation— that if a jury, — ^and to this I would
humbly beg the attention of the Court, as
well as your attention — that if a jury shall be
satisfied ihat the measures, which were taken
hy the person indicted, were measures in his
intention calculated to the end of destroying
the kins, iu his idea e£fectua] for the purpose
intended, it cannot be a question whicn ousht
to entangle your consciences at all, whether
those measures could have effectually exe-
cuted the purpose with reference to which
they were taken.

Gentlemen, I have stated to you that the
offence with which the prisoner is charged, is
the highest known to the law of England. — I
have stated to you that it makes the party, in
the case of the king, answerable for the in-
tention demonstrated by an overt-act to the
same extent as that in which he would be re-
sponsible for the actual execution of that act
in the case of a private person. — When I have
staled that, I am also to add, that the consti-
tution of the country has provided more se-
curity for the person accused in the case of
treason, than it has provided for any party,
who is the ol^ect of accusation in any other
case known to the law of England. It has
provided in ancient times many of these se-
curities : it has provided many o( these secu-
rities in times to which the legislature which
ordained them did not think proper practi-
cally to apply those provisions, whicn they
were enactme for the defence of their poste-
rity, or such of their posterity as should
be accused of such offences. In the case
of murder, one of the highest offences
known to the law of England, the party
may be convicted upon the evidence of a
single witness: he meets in the court,
where he is tried, the jury, whose names are
at that moment first known to hnn ; he sees
in that court for 4he first time the witnesses,
npon whose testimony the deliverance is to be
made between him and the country : to that
moment he may be, and he generally is, ig-
norant even of the names of those witnesses;
and one witness credited will convict him.
Our ancestors have provided otherwise in the
case of treason; they have required (and it is
iny duty so to state it to you), that the proof
sliould not only be such, at should satisfy the

tninds of a jury of the guilt of the prisoner,
but th^t it must be formal proof too, such as
the law requires; that is, if an individual to
whom eveiy one of you should be disposed to
give the utmost credit, upon whose veraeitf
you would pledge your own lives, if an indi-
vidual witness shall speak to a single fact,
though you may believe that witness, you
cannot convict the prisoner; there must in
treason be two witnesses to convict the pri-
soner; at least one witness to prove one
overt-act laid in the indictment, and another
witness to prove another overt- act of the same
treason laid ; that is, there need not be two
witnesses to each overt-act, but one witness
to one overt- act a. d another to another overt
act are required, and are allowed by the law
to be sufficient witnesses to convict in a case
of treason.

Gentlemen, the individual accused meets
the accusation in the face of his country also
under circumstances, which form a great pro-
tection to him, which I wiil state to you pre-
sently in the words of the same ^eat judge,
whose authority I have before nted to you,
which do in some degree endanger puflfic jus-
tice; and I will state to you distinctly, why I
beg your attention to his words uoon this part
of the case. Gentlemen, the law has re-
quired, that in the case of treason, the pri-
soner should have his indictment for a given
number of days before he is called upon to
plead to it. — It likewise reguires that at the
same time, when a copy ot the indictment is
given to him, a list of his jurors shall be
given to him, and that a list of the witnesses,
who are to be produced in order to establish
the charge, shall be put into his hand. The
prosecutor, therefore, meets a person accused
of this offence in this situation — a situation
new in the Jaw of England till a very late
period. I think the trial of lord George
Gordon,* was the first which, in the history
of this country, admitted the application of
the statute of queen Anne, with reference to
the point, upon which I am now addressing
you ; for the legislature that passed this act,
did not venture to apply the provisions which
I have last stated, to the country, situated as
the country then was, but postponed the ap-
plication of them till a period, which did not
arrive, I think, till about twenty years ago.

Air. Justice Foster, writing upon this statute
before these provisions took place, states him-
self thus : — ^* The furnishing the prisoner
with the names, professions, and places of
abode of the witnesses and jury, so long be-
fore the trial, may serve many bad purposes,
which are too obvious to be mentioned : one
good purpose, and but one it may serve : it
siveth to the prisoner an opportunity of in-
forming himself of the character of the wit-
nesses and jury ; but this sinsle advantage
will weigh very little in the scale of iustice or
sound policy, against the many pad ends

1 ri

♦ See it, ant^, Vol. «l, p. 485*^

15}

36 GEORGE III.

Tried of Robert Thomas Crossfield

116

which may be answered by it. However, if
it weighein any thing in the scale of justice,
the Crown is entitlea to the same opportu-
nity of sifting the character of the prisoner's
witnesses.

Gentlemen, with respect to this matter of
the witnesses, we meet to day to try a cause
where the prisoner has been in possession of
the names of all that can be produced, in
order to support the indictment; while, at
tht« momently the names of those, who are to
support the defence, al Jiough given in to an
officer of the court, ar^ very properly, with a
view to do justice to the intention of the
legislature, withheld from those who are to
prosecute.

GepUemen, I mention this circumstance
ibr the purpose only of desiring your attention
to an observation which I am now about to
state to you, in a case of the extraordinary
nature, the circumstances of which I have to
detail to vou. It may possibly occur that I
may be obliged to call witnesses in this case,
who may be unwilling enough even to state
the truth to you upon this subject. You will
give, I am persuaded you will, that attention,
which the policy and spirit of $uch provisions
as those which I have mentioned, must re-
quire from a jury; — I mean a jealous and
anxious attention to the testimony, and the
nature of the testimony, which every witness,
on .every side, in this important business, shall
lay before your consciences, remembering that
the country and an .individual meet together,
under these disadvantages which I have been
stating.

Gentlemen, some of the overt acts, stated
in this indictment, charge the prisoner with
conspiring with the other parlies named
in it, Paul Thomas Le Maitre, John Smith,
and George Ili^gins, to procure and pro-
vide a certain lublrument for the purpose
of discharging an arrow, and likewise an
arrow to be charged and loaded with poison,
with intent to discharge, and cause to be dis-
charged the same arrow, by means of the in^
strument, against the king's person, and
thereby to kill him. The next overt act is,
that the prisoner employed a person, of the
same of Hill, to make two pieces of wood to
be used as models, for the making and form-
ing certain parts of the said instrument, for
the traitorous purpose last aforesaid, and did
deliver to him a certain paper with certain
drawings thereon, drawn and designed as in-
structions and directions for making such
models. There are likewise charged consul-
tations among the parties, and the employ-
ment of a man of the name of Upton, to
whom this paper was delivered, for the pur-
pose of forwarding the project, and the deli-
vering to him of a metal tube, which was to
be part of the instrument. And then the in-
dictment charges again the same overt-acts,
leavine out the fact of the consultation about,
and the construction of the arrow charged
' h pojisoD, with intent to kill the king by

means of the arrow; but charging the fact of
the fabrication of the instrument or air-gun,
for tlie purpose of discharging it, as it might
be discharged against the persuaof the king,
without makins the poisoned arrow part of
the contents to oe discharged.

Gentlemen, before I state to you what I
shall be able to do without employing a great
deal of vour time and attention in this case, I
mean tne circumstances of it, you will give
me leave to state, very shortly, what has passed
relative to this matter, before I had the ho-
nour of addressing you impanelled in that
seat.— There was a person of the name of'
Upton, whose name occurs upon this indict-
ment, and whose name you will hear very
frequently in the course of this trial, who was
a mechanic, that lived in Bell-yard, near
Temple-bar, who gave an information to the
highest magistrates of this country, I mean
his majesty's privv council, a considerable
time ago, in which he distinctly charged him-
self, the prisoner at the bar, and other per-
sons whose names occur upon this record
with the offence, the charge relative to which
you are this day to determine upon.

Gentlemen, I before stated to you that the
law of England requires two witnesses in the
case of high treason; they must be two cre-
dible persons, and one should have to lament,
certainly, if one of them was an accomplice
in the fact. It became necessary to scniti-
nize, wilh reference to this provision of the
law, this mysterious matter, as in some parts
of it perhaps it may appear to you to be, very
diligently, and very accurately. The prisoner
at the bar, chargea with this ofifencc, thought
proper, as I shall prove to you as I am in-
structed, to fly from the accusation, and not
to meet the justice of his country. The other
persons, whose names occur in this indict-
ment, were apprehended. That species of
diligent examination was given to the subject,
which it was the duty of these great magis-
trates to give, in a case which aimed directly
at the life of the sovereign. In the course of
this business those persons, so apprehended,
were discharged upon bail — after the discharge
of those persons upon bail, Mr. Crossfield, the
prisoner, came from France to this country,
under circumstances which it will be my duty
to state to you, and accompanied with a bod v
of evidence upon this subject to which it will
be necessary, when I do state them, that you
should give particular attention ; and which
made it incumbent upon those who have mat-
ters of this sort to direct, to propose to a grand
jury of the country the whofe of the case,
with a view that they should determine, in
the first instance, whether this charge ought
to be submitted to that jury of the country
which is to day to decide upon it

Gentlemen, this business, if looked at with
reference to all the circumstances which
aflfect all the parties in it, is extremely com-
plicated : it was carried in the form of an in-
dictment before a grand jury of the coimtry.

171

for High Treason.

A. D. 1796«

[18

Upon princiDle — ^whether that principle was
founded in Ihe law of the country or not, it
is not material for me at this moment to con*
uder — but from principle, they refused to
pcnnit the evidence in this business to be laid
Dcfore them in the order which had a natural
tendency to make that eridcnce intelligible ;
they took the whole matter into their own
hands, and, examining all the parties upon
the subject, and particularly examining that
person of the name of Upton, whom I have
tiefore described to you as an accomplice,
they ibund the bill against all the prisoners.
Gentlemen, unwilling as anv person would
hive been, undoubtedly, to have tried this
cause upon the credit of Upton alone, or of
U]pUa confirmed by any other individual, or
copfamed even by strong circumstances, it
would anquesttonably have been my duty, if
it had been in my power, to have called that
person here to>day, to have given his evi-
dence to yoii, but withal to have stated, as
iar as it became me, and under the correction
of the wisdom which presides here, that his
evidence ought to have been received with
great jealousy and with great attention ; that
youinig^t to protect, against such a witness,
a prisoner, put upon bis deliverance before
you, till your unwillinmess to receive his tes-
timony had been suboued by a conscientious
conviction, arising out of all the circumstances
of the case, not only that he was as guilty as
be admitted himself to be, but that omer per-
sons represented bv him to be equally guilty
with hunself actually were so.

Gentlemen, it has however happened, whe-
ther fortunately for justice or not I will not
take upon myself to determine, because in
my situation and as a man I do feel that, if
on the part of the pubUc I have to regret that
this man's testimony cannot be ottered to
you, on the other hand, that I ought to re-
member, that if this man's testimony could
have been refuted by anv circumstances esta-
blished on the part of the prisoner, or if b^
iny examination addressed to him by the pri-
soper, or by others, the innocence of the
prisoner could be established, it would be
undoubtedly a public duly to produce such a
person; — ^be ought to be produced, with a view
thatguilt might be detected if it does exist,
snd, on the oUier hand, that innocence may be
establbb^ if it has been improperly accused.
Since ^e bill however was found, it has hap-
pened that by the act of God that man has
ceased to exist : he is dead ; and I shall have
occasion probsibly, in the course of what I
have to ofier to your attention, to prove that
circumstance. It is veir remarkable that —
as I should unquestionably have asked vou,
if I had had that person to have producea as
a witness at the bar this day, not to couv«ct
the prisoner upon his evidence, unless yon
had been satisfied by his evidence as con-
firmed by other testimon;^ in the cause of the
prisoner's guilt— I say it liappeos very re-
markably, that I liave a case to lay before
VOL. XXVI.

you, in which T may say in the outset, as I
should have been disposed, if he had been
here, to have said in the conclusion, that you
may lajr his testimony out of the case from
the beginning to the end of it.

Gentlemen, I shall proceed now to state
to you the circumstances uf this case, as the v
affect the prisoner at the bar, Mr. Crossfield.
It was in the month of August, I think, 1794,
that the charge was first broueht forward b^
Upton ; and being veny unwilling (though it
is both a delicate and a difficult task to avoid
it) to make any such direct representation to
you as he made to others upon the subject, I
had better, perhaps, proceed to state to you
the efiect of that representation, by men-
tioning to you the facts which I am instructed
to say the witnesses whom I shall call will
prove against the prisoner, than detail to you
what Upton personally represented with re-
spect to any one of these facts.

Gentlemen, there are two questions of fact,
which will deserve your particular attention.
The first is, whether the prisoner at the bar
really was engaged in a concern to fabricate
such an instrument as is mentioned upon this
record ; and the next question for you to try
will be, whether, if that be demonstrable and
clear, it is or is not equally clear that that ii>-
strument, which he was so engaged in fabri-
cating, was fabricated with the intent and for
the purpose chained in this indictment— that
is, to compass what he had imagined, the
death of the king. With respect to the former
of these facts, you will find by a witness whom
I shall call to you, of the name of Dowding,
that in September, 1794, upon the 8th of
that month (and I should here advise you,
that some of those witnesses whose testimony
I am about to state do not know the indivi-
duals, or some of the individuals, who ap-
plied to them, but it will be distinctly proved
to you by other persons that will be called
who those individuals were), a person of the
name of Dowding, who is a journeyman to a
Mr. Penton, that lives in New-street square,
and who is a brass- founder, will inform you
that, upon the 8th of that month, in the
aftemoou, three men — whom I now state to
you were Upton, who is dead; the prisoner^
Mr. Crossfield; and a person of the name of
Palmer, who will be called, came to his
master's shop; that they asked him for a
tube three feet lono;, and of five -eighths of an
inch diameter in the bore: you will find he
states the dimensions to be the same as other
brass founders to whom they apfjly — five-
eighths of an inch in the bore, and it was to
be smooth and correct in the cylinder in the
inside The witness will inform you, if I am
rijhtly instructed, that he showed them a
piece of a tube, and asked if that would do
with respect to the size of it ; that they in**
formed him it would do, but that it must be
thicker, in order that it mi^ht be smaller in
the bore; the expense ol it they seemed
anxious about in their inquiries : the expense

C

19]

36 GEORGE IH.

Trial cf Robert Thomai Crossfield

[20

he stated to them in eeneral woi:dd be high,
but what would be the f)articular expecae of
it he could not take upon hunself to state :
he inquired what they wanted this tube for ;
and you will find, if I am rightly instructed
with respect to his evidence, that the answer
given to that was, that the purpose for which
they wanted it was a secret^ and that they
could not disclose it to him.

Gentlemen, they applied upon the same
day to another person of the name of ^and
(the former not being able to supply them
with the article that they wanted)^ who is a
brass-founder at No. 40, Shoe-lane, Fleet-
street : there were but two of them that came
originally to him, and you will be satisfied
that they were Upton and the prisoner. They
asked for a tube, for a pattern to make ano-
ther by : after they haci asked for this tube,
Palmer came in. This witness not being able
to supply them, you will find thev made ano*
thcr application upon the same day to a per-
son of tne name of James Hubbart, who lives
in Cock-lane, Snow-hill, and is likewise a
brass- founder ; he lives in the shop of a per- I
son of the name of Michael Barnett, to whom
he was apprentice : and upon their address-
ing a question to him similar to that which
ttey had addressed to the witnesses whose
names I have before-mentioned, he referred
them to a person of the name of Flint, who is
a man in the same shop, and who will like-
wise be called to you ; and he will inform you
that they asked him also for a tube ; the bar-
rel, I beheve, was to be five- eighths of an
inch in the bore, and about the eighth of an
inch in thickness; that they proposed to
finish it themselYes, if the witness would cast
and bore it : the witness told them that he
must have a pattern ; and then some conver-
sation passed with respect to this pattern.
They were verf anxious to know, as jrou will
find from his testimony, how long it would
be before this barrel could be made : he gate
them an answer upon that subject: ^nd you
tnll hear under what circumstances they
carted with him. At\er these applicatiobs
tiad t>een made to these several brass-founders,
Upton and Crossfield, the prisoner at the bar,
applied to man of the name of Hill, who will
likewise be called to you. Palmer being iiso
in theiP company ; anil the evidence that Hill
win give you is this— that Crossfield pro-
duced to him a paper, which I have now in
my hand, which contains the model of part
of an air- gun ; that is to say, it contains a
drawing, by which drawing Hill, whose busi-
ness was that of a turner in wood, was to fa-
bricate the wooden part of the instrument.
Hill, you will also find, asked them what they
wanted this instrument for : they did not in-
form him that it was a secret; but they
«told him that it was for an electrical ma-
chine.

Gentlemen, this paper will deserve your
very particular attention ; befcause I have rea-
son to believe that you will find not only that

this paper was delivered by Mr. Cfdssfield to
Ilill, but that that part of the writing upon
the paper, which states the dimensions of the
instrument, is in the hand-wnting of Mr.
Crossfield. Hill, in consequence of this, fol-
lowing the drawing, turned some of the
wooden parts of the model, a part of which I
have now in my hand ; and which it will be
proved to you he carried, according to his
orders, to Upton, in whose possession it will
be proved that this part of the wooden model
was found, as well as the tube, which I have
now in my hand. It will be material for you
to give your particular attention to tiiese
circumstauces by-and-by.

Gentlemen, besides all this, it will likewise
be proved to you, that there was in the pos-
session of Upton another drawing, containing
>nodels of the instrument which we have
charged in the first part of the indictment was
to eject an arrow for the purpose of destroy-
ing the king ; and when I have to state to
you by-and-by the conversations of the pri-
soner Crossfield which will be proved with
respect to the tube and the arrow, and the
nature of the instrument, you will see the mai
teriality of the circumstances to which I am
at present calling your attention. The other
paper I have in my hand ; and it contains
dinerent parts of this intended instrument.
There is one part of it, to which you may
think your particular attention is due; be-
cause, if I prove the circumstances that I have
already stated, it will be incumbent upon the
prisoner, I apprehend, more particularly after
thie evidence which I have to offer to you
with respect to ll)e intent, to give you some
evidence for what purpose such an instrument
as this was actually constructed. Here is a
drawing of the arrow, which is of the form
that you may see perhaps by my holding the
paper up to you in this manner. It is like a
narpoon, and it has this peculiar circum-
stance aix>ut it, that it is so formed, that when
it presses against any hard substance the two
forks of it compress together, enter into the
substance, and there is a hole at the etid of
it, which would then emit some substance,
which it is calculated to hold.

Gentlemen of the Jury, it will also be
proved by another witness whom I shall have
to call, of the name of Cuthbert, that Upton
and the prisoner went to him some time in
the month of August, 1794, for the purpose
of looking at an air- gun that Cuthbert had.
Cuthbert appears io luive been an acquaint-
ance of Upton's. You will hear from the wit-
ness himself what was the conduct of the pri-
soner at the bar with respect to that air-^n
in the possession of Cuthbert : he examined
it ; he handled it \ stated that it would do
very well for the purpose ; and after a con-
versation of this sort they left Cuthbert.

Gentlemen, it may probably be proved, if
it be necessary witli respect to the case of
this prisoner, that some of these instruments
which I have been stating were in the hands

II

21]

Jbr High Treason*

ef the other parties whose names are upon
this record; it is also possible that papers,
material to establish the facts alleged against
sone of these parties, may be thought, accord-
log to the course wluch this cause maj take, ne*
cessanr to be produced in evidence upon this
triai ; but, witnout detaining you with respect
to the particulars of the evidence which ap-
plies to other persons, I think, if I prove the
facts that have been already stated as against
Mr. Crossfield, and if you shall find that there
is distinct evidence of the intention with
which he was en^ed, in drawing these
model^ and providins for the fabrication of
these instruments, Uiat there can be very
Lttle doubt indeed in respect of his case.

Gentlemen, when the other parties were
apprehended, I have before told you that Mr.
Crosafiekl absconded. I believe I shall be able
Id prove to your satisfaction by a witness whom
I snail have to call to you of the name of
Pahner, whose name I have before men*
tioaed, some of the circumstances I am now
about to open to your attention, as well as a
great many of the circumstances whidb I have
already stated.

Mr. Crossiieid usually lived in London.
Hie first place in which be hid himself, aAer
this charR was made, was Bristol : he returned
aftenrarni from Bristol to Loiidon : and from
lioodon he went to Portsmouth, where he
engaged himself on board a ship called the
Pomona, which was employed in the South
Sea Whale fishery. I prolttUy need not
mentkn to you gentlemen that the voyage
of a slup, ensagol in that commerce, is of
a conswerable duiatioD— sixteen or eigh-
teen months I believe— bemg a surgeon, he
hired himself at Portsmouth on board that
▼esseL He went usually by the name of
doctor: it will be proved to you by witnesses
who come forwara in this business under cir-
cumstances, that entitle them to great credit,
at least so I submit to your consideration, that
this vessel sailed from Portsmouth to Fal-
mouth ; that during the voyage frem Ports-
mouth to Falmouth you will find^if I am rightly
instructed, with respect to the representations
that the mariners on board this vessel have
made, Crosafield conducted himself with the
tfeatest decency and propriety; his name
however was unknown. They sailed from
Palmouth, and after they got out to sea in
the progress of their voyage. Mr. Orossfield
infiMmed the witnesses who will be called to you
who he .was. You will hear the account that
ho nve of himself, the account that he ^ve
of the part, that he had in this transaction,
the circumstance of his relating his escape,
and his dectarations that, if it was known that
he wte leaving this countrv in that vessel, the
government would probahly send a frigate
after him, that he states in the most distinct
manner, even before the capture of the Po-
miona, to some of the witnesses that will be
called to j^ou, cireomatKiees df his own coo'
aeiion andlmsaiition ia the bjusineas^ which

' A. D. 1796. [22

I have been opening to you, with express
and clear and pointed reference to these
models, to the tube, to the arrow, and to the
other particulars that I have opened.

Gentlemen, in the course of the voyage this
vessel was taken by a French Corvette, the
La V'engeance : she was carried into Brest r
you will hear from the witnesses the conver-
sation that passed between them and Mr.
Crossfield, when this capture took place : the
satisfaction which he expressed that he had

got even out of that situation of danger which
e conceived himself to be in whilst he was
a part of the crew of any English ship: the
satisfaction that he had, in having been cap-
tured by a French frigate, and taken into that
country where he would be safe. You will
hear what the whole of his demeanor was
whilst he remained on board that French
ship which captured him, and when he was
in the harbour of Brest. He was first re-
moved, in consequence of conduct, the details
of which will be given by the witnesses as
connocted with this business, from the French
Corvette into another vessel called the Eliza-
beth, which was an English ship, that had
been captured by the French, and out of her
into another vessel, which was called the
Humphries, and there are persons in respect-
able situations from among the prisoners,
that were detained in each of these vessels to
state to you evidence which, without detailing
it to you particularly, I think can leave, if it
is entitled to any credit, no doubt upon your
minds that, if Mr.Crossfield was concerned in
the fabrication of these instruments, or the
drawing of these models, the intent, with
whieh ne was concerned in that fabrication
and that drawing, was most distinctly the
purpose and the intent charged^in this indict-
ment, I. e. the intent to kill the king.

Gentlemen of the jury, you will not be 8ur«
pnsed if ^ou hear from witnesses, whose tes-f
timony will be given to you, that Mr. Cross-
field, being carried into Brest under such cir-
cumstances as I have stated, was rather in
the situation of a superintendant over the
English prisoners on oehalf of the French,
than as a companion with those unfortunate
persons who had been captured by the French,
and were detained in their prison ships there.
I have reason to think that you will also find
that it was his project either to remain there
or to go into Holland. In a coursed of time
however cartel ships were to come over into
this country ; with what intention Mr. Cross-
field' came over into this country it is not for
me to examine nor to insinuate. You will
collect this yourselves from the testimony
which those witnesses will give you ; but you
will hear circumstances which arc remarkable
enough — that Mr. Crossfield was constantly, in
company with the commissary of the French
prisoners — that be will appear, according to
the testimony of one of the witnesses, to have
gone ashore a day or two before these cartel
sfaips JicA Brest, m order to meet a member

83]

36 GEORGE III.

Tritd of Robert Thomat CrotsfieU

C24

or members of the Convention ; that shortly
before he left that country he took the name
of Wilson : that in his own hand-writing he
was mustered among the prisoners by the.
name of Wilson, as having been captured by
the La Vengeance, not out of this vessel called
the Pomona, but out of a vessel called the
Hope ; for what purpose he changed his name,
or tor what purpose he changed the name of
the vessel in which he was captured, it will
be for ^ou to determine, when you have heard
the whole of the evidence.

The witnesses will also state to you the
circumstances which took place when the
prisoners were put on board the cartel shins,
and you will see that it was familiar to the
commissary of the French prisoners, that this
man should pass by the name of Wilson, as
having been captured in the Hope, and that
under that false name he shoula come over
to this country. Gentlemen, you will also
hear the witnesses inform you that in the
course of the voyage between Brest and this
country, Mr. Cross6eld distinctly desired one
of them, the only one I believe who was in
the vessel in which he came over, not to
8tate his name, and not to state those circum«
stances of conduct and the declarations which
had taken place whilst he and that witness
were detained tojgether in the harbour of Brest.
They landed I think atFowey in Cornwall, in
the neighbourhood of Mevagissy. Some of
these seamen, the witnesses, who are persons
in respectable situations on board ships, mates
and officers, thought it their duty, under a
very different impression wiUi respect to Mr.
CrossGeld's conduct, than perhaps that which
they might have had if they haa known what
had been passing in this countr;^, but yet
under an extremely serious impression in their
minds, to go instantiy to a magistrate to
inform him what had passed in France, with
respect to the conduct of this person. In
consequence of that charge made by persons,
who knew nothing of what had beeia passing
in this country, except so far as the circum-
stances that had been passing in this country
had been related by the prisoner himself, the
prisoner wasapprebended; being apprehended.
It will be in evidence before vou that, as he
went before the ma^strate irom Fowey or
Mevagissy to the county gaol, that he mti«
mated to the persons who were conducting
him there, that it might be for their interest
to permit him to escape : he stated to them
that a sum of ^ve shillings was all that they
could expect for the exectition of the duty,
which they were then upon: that he had the
means of giving them much more. These
persons will state to you the whole of the
conversation which passed, and on the sug-
gestion I think of one of them that the plan
ivould not answer the purpose of Mr. Cross-
field, because the driver would still be to be
disposed of, and asking the question what
would become of the post boy, the answer
jgiven to that waa that the post boy might be

disposed of by the usie of a pistol which one
of these officers had.

Mr. CrossGeld was brought up before hrs
majesty's pnvy council, and he was committed
to the Tower, and in conseauence of all this
additional testimony, which has immediate
relation to Mr. Crossfield, but which connects
itself with the circumstances which have be-
fore been stated with respect to the other pri-
soners, it became a matter of duty to submit
the whole of the case to a mnd jur^ of tiie
country. They found the bul, the prisoner's
deliverance upon which is now before you.

I have studiously forborne to mention
several circumstances which relate more par-
ticularly, and more especially to other persons
whose names are upon this record. I f I prove
this case, as I am instructed to say I shall
prove it, and if I prove it as I have opened it
to you, I apprehend there can be no aoubt of
this prisoner's guilt. If that be the result of
the testimony which is given toyou^ gen-
tlemen, though it is a punful duty, it is a duty
absolutely incumbent upon me, to ask at your
handSy on the behalf of the country, the
verdict of Guilty. On the other hand, if
vou are not satisfied that ' the offence of
high treason according to the statute, is
proved by evidence according to law, against
the prisoner, certainly you do no more in that
case, than your duty to your country requires,
in acquitting the prisoner.

You have before you a case of great import-
ance. It is a case, which I am sure you will
listen to with great attention. I am confident
that you ^1 decide it with unimpeachable
integrity, and in your verdict, whatever it
may be, I hope the country will feel a perfect
satisfaction that they have had the case deli- '
berately considered, and honestiy decided
upon, by the twelve men, to whom I have the
honour to address myself.

Lord Chief Justice J^e.^Mr. Attorney
General you do not open any particular con-
versation upon the point of connexion of this
instrument with the use that you suppose was
meant to be made of it; if you in your judg-
ment conceive that the conversation that did
pass will support that connexion. I shall be so

rsrfectiy satisfied with Uiat declaration, that
think we may go on ; if it were otherwise,
an observation would occur upon the case as
you have opened it.

Mr. Attorney General. — ^I will state why I
did not mention the particulars of the conver-
sation, I think it is better the witnesses should
state the conversatioti in their own way of
stating it, than that counsel should undertake
to make a representation of it ; I understand
myself to be pledged to the Court, to this, that
the conversation was the most direct thi^ can
possibly be stated for the purpose of proving
an intention as connected with the instru-
ment, f

Lord Chief Justice JSJyre^-I am perfeslly
satisfied with that declaration.

Mr. Attorney GemrnL^Yei if the Court

25]

far High Treason.

think it the better way that I should state in
detail the comrersation, I am perfectly ready
to do it ** Damn me I was the ringleader of
the three that intended to blow a dart at his
majesty.**

Lord Chief Justice JElyre. — ^You have said
quite enough for my satisfaction.

Mr. Attorney General, — My reason for not
stating the particulars of the convei^tion
which this man had with each of the witnesses,
was this, and no other ; I could have repre-
sented generally the nature of the conversa-
tion, but I have collected an opinion in which
I may be wrong, that it is more just towards
the prisoner, after generally statine to a jury
that conversations were held of such and such
an efiect^ to leave the detail of the particulars
to the witnesses, that the witnesses* account
of it may make the due impression upon
the mind of the jury, rather than to make
a representation myself, where if I happen
to be mistaken, I may create a prejudice in
the minds of the jury.

Evidence fob the Cbowh.

JiAn Dcmding sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Law.

In the month of September, 1794, where
did you live and work ? — I worked with Mr.
Ponton, in New*street- square, No. 39.

What is Mr. Penton's business?— A brass-
ibunder.

Do you remember being in his employment
on the 8th of September, 1794 ?— Perfectly
well.

Do you recollect on that day any men
coming to his house who were not known to
youF — I was called down on the 8th of Sep-
tember, by the clerk ; when I came down into
the counting-house, there were three men
standing there.

Do you recollect any thing particular of
the person of one of them ?— One of them was
a lame man.

Did you see that man afterwards seas to
enable you now to say who that haie roan
was P— Yes*

Who was that lame man ? — Upton; one of
the others was a tall roan.

Do you now know who the other two men
were ? — ^Not to roy knowledge.

If you saw them again sbmild you recollect
them ? — ^I cannot say.

' What did they ask you for ? — ^When I came
into the coonting-house they asked me if I
could make them a tube ; I asked them what
aort of a tube ; they said it was to be three
feet long, the eighth of an inch thick, five-
eighths of an inch inside the bore, and to be
seven eighths the outside ; it was to be quite
perfect, and the inside was to be quite a
smooth cylinder.

Did you, upon that, show them any part of
a tube ?— -I asked them what sort of a tube it
was to be ; they asked me wlmt the price
would be; I told them I could not tell ; they
asked me if I could teUtoa few shillings; I

A. D. 1796. [2d

told them I could not, as my master was not
within ; then I showed them a piece of a tube.
Mr. Lmc.— Was that the piece of tube you
showed them ? [showing the witness a brass
tubel.

witneu, — It was a piece of a similar size ;
they said that would do if it was smaller in-
side, that it was of the right size the outside,
but it must be thicker, and then the bore
would be less.

Did you ask what it was for ?— I did not
then ; they asked me then if I could not tell
them nearly what the price would be ; I told
them no, I could not, oecause it was an out-
of-the-way job, and I roust make tools on
purpose to make it ; that I must make a tool
to draw it on, to make it smooth inside.

Did you ask them what was to be the use
of it?-^I told them if they would tell me the
use of it, I could be a better judge how to
make it, and, perhaps, could make it better
for their use ; they answered it was a secret ;
it was Upton made answer it was a secret,
and the others seemed to agree with him,
they all seemed to be in one voice, saying
that it was a secret

Did you undertake the job ? — ^I did not.

Did you sive any reason why you would
notundertuceitP— Yes. When I was talk-
ing of makine things for* it, he asked me if I
knew what the price ofit would be, I said I
could flot tell the price of it

Relate what more passed when you were
present?— When they asked me about the
price, I told them it was rather an out-of-the-
way job, and that to make it quite parallel in
the inside, I must make tools on purpose 1o
make it ; they asked roe how much the ex-
pense would be ; I told them I could not tell ;
they asked me if I could not tell to a few
shillings,^ I said I could not, that my master
was not within, and I was very busy myself;
I told them at last that it was a job not worth
while undertaking as I was unite busy ; I told
them then as I said before, that if they would
tell me the use of it. I could be a better judgjo
how to make it, and, perhaps, could make it
better for their use ; they answered me it was
a secret. Then they produced a piece of tube
that they had bought before at our house, and
had some money returned, which was, I think
ten-pence ; the money was returned to Upton.

Whom did they deliver that back to?— To
me ; but the clerx returned the money.

What is his name?«-Ma8on ; but he is not
in our service now ; it was such a bit of tube
as this, it was of the same size.

Did they all seem to be concerned in the
same busmess P— They apjpeared to be of the
same sort.

You stated, that what one said, the rest as-
sented to ?— Yes ; they seemed to be the same
company; what one said the others stood to ;
but as to taking my oath to the people I can*
not^if I was to see them perhaps.

What passed after retummg the tube?—
Nothing else passed, they went away.

»7]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial qf Robert ThdmasCrossfield

[28

John Dowding cross-examined by Mr. Adam,

This you say passed on the 8th of Septem-
ber, 1794? — Yes; our books will show ii.

Three persons came together?— They were
together when I came down ; X cannot say
whetiaier they came together into the count-
ia^house.

The only one of these whom you can speak
to positively is Upton ? — I never saw any of
the rest.

You never saw any of the others either be-
fore or since? — Upton I have seen since.
I can swear to him.

But the two otlicrs you had not seen before
aor since ? — Not to my knowledge.

You talk of a tube which they had got atyouv
house being brought back, and ten-pence
being returned to them ; what do you mean
by that ? do you mean the same three per-
aoas? — ^There was but one person returned it,
all khree could not join hand in hand.

Were all the three persons together, at the
tMBC of returning it ?»>They were as close as
I am to this gentleman next nse.

When did they get the tube that Aey re-
turned?—I caniiot say.

How can you teU that they thev got that at
your house f — ^The clerk retumedf me money
to them.

You cannot say any thing of your own
knowledge, about the tube that was returned?
There was a tube sot from your house ? — Yes;
or we should not have returned the.money to
them.

Get by Upton?— I cannot say which of
tiieoi got it.

The money was returned at that time ?— It
tras.

You say Uptoa was the person who spoke ?
—He was the person that spoke the moui, the
rest joining sometimes.

Do you recollect any thing particularly that
Upton said ? — ^He was the person who spoke
to me when I came down, and aaked me if I
could make a piece of tube.

Then you discoursed about the price of it?
— -Not then, it was afterwards.

Did you ask any particular price ?— I asked
no price at all.

Did you sa^r it would be a thing of great
cost? — I said it would be expensive.

When they asked how much eaq>enae, did
you say how much ^— No.

Then you gave them no idea of whether it
would cost them a ^inea» five guineas^ or ten
guineas ? — Being a joiimeyman I could not

The discusuon aJMHit tlie 'price wat quite
general ? — Yes.

Can you swear, positLYdy,. that these per-
ioni were present dorinff the whole ooiMreraa-
^on between you and Upton P«-I can sweav
positively, that theie were th»e in the mom
all the time..

Are there not women employed in your
house in bcquering b/afisi-^-Tnete are-.

Does the operation of lacquering brass go
on in the same place, or in an adjoining one ?
— In the same house.

In the same apartment?— Not in the same
room.

Therefore, if any of these persons went to a
woman that was lacquering brass, of course
they must have been in a mifcrent apartment
from that in which the conversation is sup-
posed to have oassed with you ? — ^They did
not go out while I talked with them, they
might before J came down ; to my knowledge
tliey did not; I did not see any of them go
there.

You cannot speak to the persons of the
other two, you never saw them Wore ? — Not
to my knowledge.

Nor since P — Not to my knowledge.

And Uie thing went off entirely upon ydur
saying, it could not be done but at some cer*
tain expense ?— Yes.

Of the three, Upton was the person who
spoke most? — Yes.

I think you said, that when it was told you
it was a secret, it came from Upton's voice ? —
I did not hear them all, but I can swear Upton
said that ; but they were all just together.

The two othef* persons did not say any
thing that you can ehargie yow memory with fi
—No, I cannot.

Did th^ say any thing about its being a
secret ?— It was just as they were going away
it was said it was a secret

And its beinff a secret came from Upton's
voice, and not from either of the others ? — I
cannot swear to any other person's voice,
they all seemed to jom together, but Upton's
voice I heard in particular. — ^As for the other
voices I cannot tell.

Joseph Flint sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Garrow.

You are, I believe, a braas-foundery in Cock
Lane, Snow Hill ?— Yes.

Do you remember being applied to, in the
month of September, 1794, to attend any per-*
sons in respect to a brass tube that was wantr
ed ? — I do.

Can you recollect what day of the month it
was ? — No.

What day of the week ? — ^No.

Do you recollect what hour of the fby ? —
It was some time after dinner, I believe.

Do you remember in what part of the
month the aoaiversary of hisms^estys corov
nation foils ?— On the 2fld of September.

Wasit before or aAer the SSd of Septem-
ber?—Being eaikd in January, 1795, 1 made
an inquiry among the men.

Mr. Gorrov.— Do not tell us any thing
that is the mere effect of information from
others. But have you, after an inquiry, been
ablets satisfy your own mind in wnat part of
the menlh it was ?'^^ot at aU.

WhMtime of the day was it?--I beiie^c
immediately after dinner.

You wese called b;jr your servant to attend

29]

Sw Hi^ Treason*

A. D. 1796.

[SO

to these persons? — By my ftpprenticey James
Hubbart.

How maoy people came to ifou?— Three
persons.

Did you make any observation tipon the
person of any one of them ? — One I obsenned
to be a lame man.

Did you observe whether be had any iron
on or not? — No; I observed one to limp as
be was going out at tlie door.

Relate what passed between you and those
persons. — They asked, first of all, for a long
pistol-barrel; I produced a musketooo-barrel
to them; it was observed that would not do,
they did not want it plugged up at the end ;
'.from that I observed, that I apprehended it
must be a straight cylinder that they wanted;
'they sadd it was; that it must be about five-
eighths of an inch diameter in the bure, and
tiie eighth of an inch thick ; and they said, if
I would cast it, and bore it, they would
finish it themselves. I told them, I should
not undertake to do it without they brought
a pattern ; one of them observed, would not
a rocket^case do ; I aaid it would^ if they
^ilueged up the end.

"f hat was for a model ? — Yes.

W hat was to be the len^h ? —There was
no length specified at that time ; they went
away after that. I believe one of them asked
how long it would take making, to which I
answered about three days.

During the time these persons were with
Ton, did they all take a share in tlie conver-
satiofiy or was it confined to any ome of tliem ?
— ^The lame man seemed to be the principal.
• Did the others interfere in the course of
the conversation? — I know it was not the
lame man that asked me as to the time when
it might be done.

In eeneral it was the lame man that con-
versed with you upon the subject? — In gene-
ral it was.

I believe, since the time of this conversa-
tion, you have seen a persoa of the name
of Upton? — I saw him in September, 1795.

Did you, when you saw him tiien, recollect
ha«iii£ seen him before ? — ^1 did not.

Dkfyou know whether he was the lame
man that conversed with yon? — I cannot
•ay.

Is that all you know upon tite suiHcct ? —
Yes.

Joseph Flint cross-examined by Mr. Gurney.

When you were called dowa, you say,
these persons were in your shop? — Yes.

Who was the person that tpoke to you
first?— I believe it was the iame man.

Do you recollect anything that either of
them besides the lame man said, except ask-
ing as to the time it would takie making? —
There was something respecting a rocket-case,
but I cannot recollect now what it was.

Every thing else passed betiveen you and
the lamemauf-^Yes.

Joseph Flint re-exanined by Mr. Gorrago.

Did the Question with respect to the time
that would oe occupied in doing the jot> re-
late to that about which the lame man had
been conversing? — ^Yes; the time it would
take to make the tube.

Of which the other had been Kwakioc ?«•
Yes.

Were you examined before the privy conn-
dl ?— Yes.

Did you see UpUm there ? — ^I saw him ia
September, 1795.

Are you able to say with certainty whether
Upton was the person with whom you con-
versed ?^I cannot say that.

Iliomas Blandf sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Wood.

What is your business? — A brass-founder.

Where do you live; — At No. 40, in Shoe*
lane. Fleet- street.

Do you remember any body coming to your
shop in September, 1794? — I do, very well.

Can you tell what time in September it
was ? — I cannot tell the day.

Was it in the beginning or the end of the
month ?— I cannot say.

How many persons came ?— First two men
came, and in nve minutes one man came to
inquire after these two men.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — ^Do you mean
thkt one man came in while they were there,
or after they were gone? — After^y wci!e
gone.

Mr. Wood. — W^hat did the two men come
for? — They asked for a tube or a barrel; I
told them it was not in my line of business ;
if they wanted a barrel th^v must apply to the
clock-makers, or if tliey wanted a tube they
must apply to those that draw tubes.

Did tney say what they wanted it for ? —
No ; they went away, and then another came
and asked for the two gentlemen.

Do you know who that man was ? — I think
the third that came in was Peregrine Palmer.

That was all that he said ?^ Yes, to tlie
best of my knowledge , they were gone down
the lane, he went alter them.

Thomas Bland cross-examined by Mr.

Adam.

Do you know Palmer? — I have seen him.

Did you know him at that time ?— I did not.

How long after was it before you knew
Palmer's person) — I was never acquainted
with Palmer; I saw him before the privy
conncil> they told me his name was Palmer ;
I said, to the best of my knowledge, tlmtwas
the third man Uiat came tg iaquivc for the
other two.

' You do not know who the other persons
were? — One was a lame man.

They staid but a few minutes ?-*A very few.

Aixi you did not supply them with any
thing of any sort ? — Nothing at all.

31]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomas Croufidd

[32

DaMCtAkbert sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Lam,

Where do you live ? — ^In Graham-courty
Arundel Street.

You are a mathematical instrument maker?
—Yes.

Do you remember calling upon Upton at
any time ? — ^Yes, very well.

What led you to call upon him ? — ^I called
upon^ him on purpose to subscribe a little
money for the wives and children of those
people that were in prison under suspicion of
luEn treason.

Do you remember at that time having any
conversation with him ?— Very little at that
time.

Does that little dwell upon your memory ?
— It was so insignificant that I took no notice
of it :-^I do not Know what passed at all the
first time ; the second time I called upon him
on purpose to know how the subscription
"Went on ; instead of answering concerning
the subscription, be answered me concerning
the Corresponding Society.

We will not eo at large into that — Was
there any thing tl)at led to the production of
any instrument? — ^No such a thing.

Do you remember calling upon him during
Bartholomew fair } — I had given him an invi-
tation when I first called there, seeing he was
a watch-maker, to come and look at an en*
gineof mine, which I thought very likely
might be a treat to him, as being in that line ;
it was rather out of the way, as such; he did
come ; that was nearly about Bartholomew
fair time : the distance between the times
that I had called on him and that time I can-
not well determine, but the way that I know
that he called upon me at Bartholomew &ir
lime was, a son of mine was lying ill at that
time, and I remember very well he was »"aVing
an observation »

We must not hear what your son observed
to you ; but, when you saw Upton, do jrou
recollect having any particular conversation
with him about the power of air? — ^Yes, exactly
so ; he saw an air-pump lying in my shop, I
explained it to him in the best manner I
could; I showed him an air-gun, and explain-
ed it in the best manner I could.

Afier having explained it to him, did he
come again to look at this air-gun ?— He did,
next day.

Did he come alone ? — ^No, there was a man
with him.

Do you recollect any thing particular about
the man who came with him r — ^No ; Upton
had displeased me in his conversation in the
Bteond interview I had with him, and there-
fore I neither liked him nor his acquaintance.
Pid you observe any thing particular about
the hand of that person ?— N o ; the gentleman
that came with nim told me he was veiy fond
ctf shooting, and that he had lost some of his
fingers by the explosion of a gun ; but whe-
ther he bad or had not^ i do not knoW| for I

did not look at hia band; I was rather dis-

Fisted with Mr. Upton as I said before, and
did not pay any regard to him nor his ac-
quaintance.

But he said his hand had recehred an in-
junr by the explosion of a gun ?— lie did. -

Did he handle the gun, or what did he do?
—He viewed it, and said it was a handsome
piece.

Did be apply to you to do any job for him .
— >Upton asked me if I wanted a job, I re-
plied I had got more business than I could do.
The person who was with him was by at the
time when he asked you to take thb job? —
The person that was with him was on the out-
side of the door and he was in the door-way,
it was just as he was leaving the house.

That man is the person who handled the
iur-gun?-^Hedid.

And praised it? — ^He did as a handsome
piece, which it really was.

Had you any conversation witli him about
the properties of air? — Not a word, I was at
dinner— I did not get up fromr my seat all the
time they were there, till they were just a
going, and that was merely because I thought
they stopped too long.

Have you seen tlie man who came with
Upton anywhere since? — ^Never in my life,
nor I don't think I should have known him
six hours or three hours afler he lefl my place,
I took so little notice of him.

You had so great a dislike to Upton that you
would not let yourself know the persons that
came with bim f — I did not take notice of
him, nor I do not know that I should have
known him if I had met him in the street a
minute after.

Did you see any person afterwards with
Upton before the pnvy council ? — ^No ; I never
saw Upton at all at the privy council.

Did you see any person before the privy
council who had lost any of his fingers? — ^Not
that I know of; I was at the pnvy council
when Mr. Dundas presided, and there was a
man of the name of Dennis, a sailor, in the
lobby ; at the same time a man came out, he
said there he goes; I asked who? why, said
he, Crossfield; said I do you know him ? yes,
said he, damn his eyes, I would know hia
ashes was he bumf, or any such damned raa*
calashewas; sol understood that to be the
man.

I do not ask you to declarations of other
people; but I ask you whether you did not
see a person who had a defect in his finoers,
where the privy council were sitting?— No;
I took the man that came with Upton to me,
to be a taller man^v^almost as tall as Mr.
White.

David Cuthbert cross-examined by Mr.

Gumei^.

Do you know in what part of the month of
September Bartholomew fair is held ?-^Some-
where about the 9th I suppose— it is all sup*
po&ition, for I do not know.

333

Jot High Treoim*

A. D. 1796.

IH

You say you inviled Upton to come to your
house to look at aa engine of yours, which
you thought mi^bt entertain him ? — ^Yes.

Having an air-pump in your shop induced
you to talk to him about the properties of
air ? — ^Yes.

Had he asked you anything about the pro*
perties of air before you introduced the sub-
ject ? — ( do not think he did.

Did he appear at the time to be conversant
with the properties of air ?— I do not think he

And therefore he asked you for the purpose
of enlighteninff his ignorance P — Yes.

Mr. Law, — -Was tnis at the beginning of
Bartholomew iur> or when? — I cannot tell.

Mr. Fcregrine Palmer sworn. — Examined
by Mr. Garrow.

I believe you reside in Bamard/s Inn ? —
I do.

You are an attorney by profession P— I am.

How long have you been acquainted with
the prisoner Crossfield ? — I believe about fif-
teen or sixteen years.

What is he by profession P— H& is a physi-
cian by profession.

Where did he reside P— He has resided at a
number of places since I first knew him.

Did he reside in London in the latter part
of the time during which you were intimate
with himp — He resided in Dyers-buildings,
Holbom : that was the last place I knew him
live in.

Were you- very intimate with him? — ^Yea;
there was a ereat intimacy between us.

Did you belong to any club or society of
which lie was a member P — Yes.

What might it be P — I suppose you allude
to the Corresponding Societv. I did belona to
several societies of which- he was a memoer,
among others I was a member of the London
Correaoonding Society.

Lord Chief Justice £yr<. — Was he also a
member of that society? — I do not know
whether he was- or not ; I have seen him
there.

Mr. Garrow. — ^I understand you to have an^
sweredto myfirst question, that you supposed
I alludied to the Corresponding Society; I
ask you upon your oath have you any the least
doubi that he was a member of that society ?
— ^I have not.

You have good reasons to know—You were
a delegate were not you ? — I was at one time.

Ana a chairman of the committee ? — I
scarcely know what you mean by a chair-
man.

I a^ you upon your oath whether you
were not a chairman of a comftiittee of the
London Corresponding Society P^I consider a
dele^te as a kind of a chairman.

Did Mr. Crossfield- attend the meetings
pretty regularly ? — I believe I may have seen
Aim there about three or four times ; I cau-
not tell the exact number at this distance of
time.

VOL. XXVf.

Was be of the same division with you f-^Yes.
I ask you upon your oath, did not he attend
very regularly ?— I have seen him there s^
veral times.

Was not he a regularly attending member P
— I have seen him there frequently, Ihree, four
or five times, I believe, I cannot tell the num-
ber of times at this distance.

Do you know a person who was called
Upton? — Yes.

Do you remember in the month of Septem-
ber 1794, accompanying the prisoner Crossp
field to Upton's bouse ? — Yes ; I do.

About what time in the month was it P — In
the beginning of the month ; I cannot tell
the day.

Did you and Crossfield accompany Upton
to an V place ? — Yes.

Where did you go to ? — A house ; T do not
know whether it is in New-street or in New-
street-square.

Li the neighbourhood of Gough-squareP— *
Yes.

Was it a house of any trade or business?—'
I believe it was a brass- founder's.

You and Crossfield and Upton went there'
together?— Yes.

What passed at the brass- founder's when
you were so in company ? — I know nothing of
what passed; Upton liad some business there
as I understood.

I am asking what passed at the brass-
founder's when you were uresent making one
of the company, and I aesire you to state it
upon vour oath P — I have no recollection of
any thing that passed there.

^t, Garrow, — Atten4 towhatyou are abou^
and speak the truth.

WUne»», — I know what I am about, and
shall speak nothing but the truth.

How long were yon in company with Cross*
field and Upton at the brass-founder's in New-
street P — A few minutes.

You can recollect what passed P — ^I can re-r
collect nothing at all about it.

That will- not satisfy the Court, I should
think ? — I will say the truth, I can say no
more about it.

Was there any business transacted at this
brass-founder's ?— I do not know what the
business was, it was Upton's business as I
understood ; Upton said he had some business
at this brass-founder's^ what his business was
I know not.

Nor am I asking you, except as you col-
lected it from what passed on the spot; what
passed there ?-*I cannot recollect; it was
something, in the way of his own business.

Did you see any thing produced at the
brass-founder's ? — ^Not to my recollection.

Will you swear there was not? — I will not;
but I have no recollection of any thing.

After you had finished your business there,
where did you go ? — The next place we went
to, was a house in Shoe-lane I think.
. What business was carried on there P—Thft^
same business.
D

35}

S6 GEORGE liL

I'rial of Robert Thamat CrotsfiM

[96

A brass^under? — ^Ycs.

You went immediateTy ft-om the house we
first talked of, to the house in Shoe-lane ?—
Yes.

How long were you there in company with
Crossfield and Upton ?— Ndt at all ; I did ndl
gu into the house.

You waited for them without? — ^Yes.

How lone were they there?— A very short
time indeed.

How long do you think ?-— I suppose a mi-
nute or two minutes, a very short time.

Where did you go to from the brass-
founder's in Shoe-lane ?— To a house inCock-^
lane.

You did not go with them into the house at
IShoe-lane ?— I did not.
. Upon your oath did you go in afterwards to
inquire after them?—! did.

It would have been as well to have told us
that — then after they were gone from the
brass -founder's in Shoe-lane you went in to
inauire where the <wo gentlemen were gone ?
i—l did.

In consequence of the informaUon you re-
ceived there of your two friends, you went
after them ?— Yes.

How soon did you overtake Crossfield and
Upton? — ^I overtook them in Shoe-lane; I
was informed they were just gone out.

Then you walked together to Cock-lane ?—
Yes.

To what house oftrade there?— To a person
•f the same business.

A brass-founder ? — ^Ycs.

Did you go in with them there ?— Yes ; I
believe I went into the shop.

Have you any doubt about it ?— No ; I have
not.

You three went into the brass-founder's in
Cock-lane together ? — Yes.

What passed there?— I know nothing
about it, only there were some directions given
by Upton to the brass-founder, what these
directions yrere I do not know.

Directions given with respect to what?— I
do not know, something in the way of Upton's
business. /

With respect to doing wlUit? — I haVe no re-
collection^ { am not a brass-founder ; I do not
know.

Do you know what a tube is ?— Yes ; cer-
tainly, any man must know what a tube is.

Was there any conversation there about a
brass tube and its dimensions? — I have no
recollection of any thing of that kind.

Recollect that you are upon your oath ?-«
I know that perfectly well ; and therefore I
shall say nothing but the truth.

Was there any conversation about a model ?
— ^There might be such conversation pass;
but I do not Know whether there did or not.

Do you mean to swear you do not recol-
lect any thing about a model for a brass tube,
about its dimensions, or how it was to be ap-
plied?—! do swear I do not recollect about
"^e particular business.

I am not asking you aboutparticBlais, but
give us some inrormation of^what passed;
was any brass tube produced by any body ?-^
I have no recollection that there was.

Have you ever seen any thing like this bo-
fore? [showing the witness a brass tube]
— I recollect I saw that at the privy council.

Did you never see this before, as a subjeet
upon which persons were conversing at the
time you saw it ?«-I do not recollect that I
did.

Did you ever see these before ? [showing
the witness the modelsl-^No ; I never did,

I am afraid you will forget your own chris-
tian name by-and-by; you have been long
acquainted wtlh Crossfield ? — I have.

And are well acquaintod with his hand-
writing ?— Upon my woid I , cannot say that
lam.

~ Upon your oath cannot you venture to
swear to his hand-writing?— -There is but
one thing that I can swear to his hand by, that
is the signing of his name.

You have frequently seen him write ?— t
have.

Have you ever corresponded with him ?— «
I never received five letters from Mr Crossi-
field in the course of my acqmuntance with
him.

Look at this paper [showing it to the wit-
ness] and tell me whose hand-writing you
believe that to be ? — I cannot swear to this
hand«-writing.

I do hot ask you to swear to it, and you
who are an attorney know I do not : upon
the oath you have taken whose hand-writing
do you believe that to be ? — ^I cannot swear
to a belief of this hand-writing.

Do you mean to swear that you have no
belief upon the subject?— I have not.

Do you mean to swear that you believe
that is or not the hand-writing of a man
you are acquainted with ?— I do not know
enough of it to be able to form an opinion
upon it.

Now open this paper and' look at it ; have
you ever seen it before? — ^I do not know upon
my word.

Mr. Garraw — ^I am sorry to be obliged so
often to admonish you, that you are upon
your oath ?

pritness.--You might save yourself all that
trouble I know it very well.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — You recollect
that when you answer upon your word, that
is not exactly answering on the oblieatioo
that you are speaking under, that was the oc-
casion of your being reminded that you are
upon your oath.

IFtVfiess.— I consider that when I first
came into court, I was sworn to speak the
truth.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — But it is not the
proper manner of answering to say ^ upon my
word' it may be so and so.

Witnen. It may not be a proper way of an-
swering ; but I consider tnat every thing f

37J

Jor High Treason.

A. D. 1796.

tSB

am sayiag ia ibis cettrt^ I am saying upon my
oatk.

Mr. Garrov.— Then upon the oath you
have taken, have you ever seen that paper
befbfe.— There were some papers shown me
before the privylcouncU, whether this is one
I cannot teu upon my oath I do not know.

Have you the least doubt that tliat paper
was shown to you before the privy council,
that you were inteirogated to the subject, and
that vou gave answers respecting it? — ^I do
not know whether this piece of paper was
shown me or not; there were some pieces of
p^jer shown me.

Do you mean to swear now, that you have
no be&ef whose hand- writing that is, after
looking at it?— I can form no belief
about It

You cannot be sure that you ever saw this
paper before I handed it to you ?— No.

Have you ever seen anv paper which ap-
peared to you to describe the same subject ; I
am not speaking of vour examination at the
privy council, but haa you before you were ex-
amined by the privy council seen a paper con-
taining such drawings as I have shown you ;
I tell you now that 1 have your examination
in my hand— upon vour oath had you before
your examiaation 'by the privy council ever
seen, and I shall ask you presently in whose
custody, anv paper with sinular drawings
tothb?— I 00 not recollect aay thing of the
kind.

Are you equal to the swearing that you
never had ? — ^I cannot swear that I never saw
such, but I have no recollection of any thing
of the kind.

Have 3*ou any belief of the kind ?— I can
form no belief.

I ask you once more upon your oath have
you never said when you were u|>on your
oath, that you had seen a paper similar to
that?

Mr« J^om.— Does vour lordship think this
is the proper way oi examining a witness in
chief?

Lord Chief Justice JByre.— The whole
course of this species of examination is not
regular. This b a witness for the crown ; if
be disgraces himself, which it is the tendency
of this examination to make him do, they
lose the benefit of his testimony. The idea
of extracting truth from a witness for the
crown, who dtseraces himself, is in my appre-
hension, and luways has been, a thing per-
fectly impracticable, for the moment he has
gone to the length of discreditine his testi-
mony, by the manner in which he shuiHes
with your examination, there is an end of all
credit to him. You recollect upon a very so-
lenm occasion, the jud^s were all of opinion,
that that kind of examination on the part of
a prosecution was improper, for that it always
ended in destroying the credit of your own
witness*

Mr. GaiTov.^-My otyect waS| to refresh his
memory. Be so good as look at this paper
[another paper] do you know itr-^I do not.

Do you recollect ever seeing it before? — I
cannot^say I recollect ever seeing it before, but
it appears to roe to he a paper similar to what
was shown me at the privy council.

You are correct in that — that is the paper
that was shown to you before the privy cuun-
cil-^supposing that to be the same papf r, do
you recollect ever to have seen it belure it
was shown to you at the privy council ? — I
do not.

Do you know whose hand>writing it is?-<*
I do not; it appears to be a different hand-
writing from the last you showe<l me.
Nor the drawings whose they are ?— No.
Do you know whose hand- writing this isi
—It is a hand- writing I am not acquainted
with.

The last place that they were at I think
was the brass-founder's in Cock-lane — how
long were you, Crossfield, and Upton at the
brass* foun&r's in Cock-lane? — ^A very few
minutes.

Where did you go next ?— To Mr. Hill's in
Bartholomew-close.

What business does he cany on ?— I believe
he is a turner.

A turner in brass or wood ? — I do not know :
I have heard he is a turner.

Is he a member of the London Corres*
ponding Society ? — He was at that time.

Both Upton and Crossfield, if I understand
you right, accompanied you lo Mr. Hill's ?—
Thev did so.

What passed there? — I recollect Upton
dving some instructions to Hill for some-
tning, I think the word model was made use
of, hut I am not a mechanic myself; the
word model or pattern, or something of that
nature was mentioned.

Was any drawing produced upon that occa-
sion f^I think I remember Upton produciog
some drawing.

For what purpose? — As instructions for
something that Hill was to make.

Was thatdrawing left with Hill? — I cannot
say.

You did not see the drawing made at the
time ? — I think Upton made it at the time;
but I will not positively swear that.

Do you recollect any ihing more that passed
at Hill's ?— No.

Do you recollect any thing else being pro-
duced at Hill's besides the drawing? — I do
not recollect it, there might be such a thing
produced, but I have no recollection of it.

After you had left Hill's where did you go
to next r— Mr. Cros^eld and I were gouig
somewhere upon some business together; it
was merely an accidental business Upton's
g3tng wiUi us.

That can be no answer to my present ques-
tion; which is, where you went to from
Hill's?— I cannot recollect.

Did you part there, or go any where toge-
ther afterwards ? — I believe we parted some-
where thereabouts— I do not recollect going
any where after that«

m

S6 GEORGE lU.

Trial of Robert Thomas CrossfiM

[40

Where did Upton live?— In Bell-yard.

How many times do you think, speaking
•within compass, may you have met Mr.
Crossfield at Upton's? — ^I suppose I might
have seen him once or twice before.

How often afterwards ? — I do not recollect
whetHbr I was there afterwards or not.

What is the impression upon your mind
. — At the time these things were going on, I
liad nofidea that they were of a nature that
1 should be called into a court of jusUce
to give evidence upon, and therefore I con-
sidered them as mere trivial things.

You heard of the circumstance that cert^n
persons were taken into custody upon Upton's
jinfoi-mationf— Yes; certainly.

Where was Crossfield living at that time ? —
Where I ' told you before, m Dyei's-buiid-
ings.

How soon afler the information given by
Upton became public, did Crossfield remove
ftom Dyer's buildings? — I cannot say.

How soon did vou miss him from London?
.—I have no recollection upon the subject; I
left London about that time myself, I gene-
rally go into the West of England about that
time in the year.

Perhaps he went with you? — ^He and I
went to Bristol together.

How soon after Upton's examination
l)cfore the privy council was it that Cross-
field and you left London? — I cannot say.

Was it before or after you knew that a re-
ward was advertised for the apprehension
.of Crossfield ? — Many months before that.

You went to Bristol together ? — Yes.

When did youeo to Bristol?—! think in
ihe month of OctoDer 1794, but I cannot be
certain.

Has Mr. Crossfield any family, or is he f^
aingle man ? — He is a married man.

Did his wife reside with him in t6wn ? —
6he did not reside with him at the time you
are speaking of; she did not reside with him
in Dyer's-buildings, I believe.

I meant merely to ask whether his family
went with him, or he went alone with you?-—
His wife did not accompany us.

You and he went alone ?— Yes.

How lone did you eontinue at Bristol?— I
continued there a few days, and I lef^ him at
Bristol ; he had some idea of settling at Bris-
tol, as a physician; he went down with that
intent.

Did you ever see him at Bristol agaia ?— I
did not

Did you see him in any other part qf Eng-
land soon after you left him at Bristol ? — Yes ;
I saw him in London.

How soon after you came back to London
did he return from Bristol ? — It was about the
time that I was first examined before the
privy council, that he came to London.

Where did he reside when he came to
London?— I do not know.

Did he go back to Dyer's-buildings ?— He
4id not.

Did you correspond with hint Whikt he
was at Bristol ? — I Uiink I received one letter
from him whilst he was at Bristol, and but
.cme.

Did you write to him ? — ^I do not recollect.

i wish you would try to recollect whether
you answered his letter when he was at Bris-
tol? I do not recollect whether I did; I did
not enter his letter.

Perhaps it might assist yonr memory, to
ask you whether you addressed to him by the
name of Crossfield, or any other name ? —If I
addressed to him at Bristol, it was by the
name of Crossfield.

Then did you write to him there or not?—
I do not recollect ; but I do not think I wrote
to him at all.

How long did he continue in town after his
return from Bristol ? — I think I might have
seen him at the distance of a fortnight or
three weeks.

Was this about the time tliat you were at-
tending the privy council from time to time ?
—Yes.

And you do not know where he resided ? —
No.

Where did you meet him? — I never saw
him but at my own chambers.

Did you ask hioi where he resided, if you
should have occasion to call on him or to
write to him?^I do not know whether 1 did
or not ; yes, I think I did.

But you did not know where he was to be
found ?— No.

Do vpu know where he went to after he
left Bristol?— Only from hearsay.

Did he corresDond with you afler he left
London again ? — ^No.

You probably then did not see him again
till after he was in custody? — I have only seen
him once since he was in London, and that
was at the privy council.

Mr. Peregrine Palmer cross-examined by

Mr. Adorn,

You have known Mr. Crossfield for fifteen
or sixteen years ; was be in the habit of fre-
quently coming to your chambers? — ^Yes; I
was upon terms of great intimacy with him.

Ana he came frequently to your chambers
in the months of August, September, and Oc*
tober,1794?— Hedid.

Did you happen to Know at that time the
particular state of Mr. Crossfield's health ? — I
did

What state of health v^ he in ?— I know
he was in a very ill state of health.

Was he under the necessity of taking any
medicines to alleviate pain ?— I know he usea ,
at that time, to take large quantities of
opium.

I think you said, that upon a particular day
in September, 1794, but the particular day of
the month you did not mention, you went
with him to Upton's? — Yes.

Do you happen to know how lone Cross-
field and Upton had been acquaintta before

41]

far High Trioson.

A. D. 1796.

[42

tbatt tknef-— I do not know how long before,
some very short time before.

How long had you yourself been acqusunted
with Upton before that time? — ^I suppose a
month, or two months.

Can you tell whether Mr. Crossficld*s ac-
quaintance with Upton^ was in consequence
of yonr acquaintance with Upton? — ^I believe
Crossfield*s acquaintance with Upton was by
seeing him at a division of the Corresponding
Society.

Can you tell how long this was antecedently
to the time when you went to Upton's house
with Cros^eld f — I have no recollection.

Upton was a watchmaker^ was not he ? —
He was.

Do you happen to know whether he is a
mechanic in any other respect than as a
watchmaker? — ^I remember seeing at his shop
an electrical machine that he had made,
which be showed us as a curiosity.

Upton was a member of the Corresponding
Society? — He was.

Do you happen to know whether there was
any inquiry gome forward in that Society, in
regard toUpton^ character and conduct? —
I remember he was disgraced in that so-
ciety.

Do you happen to know whether any of
the persons, who are charged upon this in-
dictment, were amone those who disgraced
him in that Society ?-— I know that Mr. Le
Msutre was one that particularly objected to
him.

Do you know of any other?— I do not.

Can you tell whether the inquiries, re-
specting Upton, were going forward about
tne end of August, or the be^nning of Sep-
tember, 1794, and down to the latter end of
September? — I cannot charge my memory as
to dates ; about that time I was in the habit
of attending some of the meetings of the so-
ciety, and it was during that time that this
inquiry took place.

Do you recollect at what particular times
you were in the habits of attending the so-
ciety?— T think in the months of August and
September of that year.

You say, that on the dav on which you and
Mr. Crossfield went to Uptoil's house, you
went with him to New-street, or New-street-
square, you cannot recollect which ? — There
are two or three streets there that are called
New-street, and New-street-square.

What was the circumstance which led you
to go to Upton's on that particular day f —
Upton had a watch of mine to repair. Cross-
field and I, I think, though I do not mean
positively to swetfr to that particular circum-
stance, Crossfield and I dined that day to-
gether, and I called afterwards with Crossfield
upon Upton for my watch.'

Do you recollect where you dined that day?
—I have no recollection.

Do you recollect in what part of the town
it was f— Somewhere in thendghbourhood of
Temple-bftr.

Upton lived in Bell-yard ?— Yes.

Then, for the reason you have given, you'
called upon Upton ? — ^Tes.

And thence you went to the house in New-
street? — ^Yes.

That was a brass-founder's?— Yes.

Did you all three go in ?— I believe we did.

Do you know who came to you upon that
occasion, whether it was the master or the
servant? — I have no recollection of either the
master or servant in the business.

From thence you went to Cock-lane? —
Yes.

You said you did not go into the house in
Cock-lane ? — No, that was in Shoe-lane.

Did any thin^ particular prevent your eoing
into the house m Shoe-lane? — ^I recollect 1
had a natural occasion to stop.

You went in afterwards and inquired whe-
ther they were gone ? — ^Yes.

And then you saw them in the street? —
Yes, I followed them.

Was it in consequence of overtaking them
there that you went with them to the next
place ? — Mr. Crossfield and I were going to-
j^ether into the city ; when I called at Upton's
for my watch, Upton said he was going the
same way and would accompany us, that was
one reason I know why Upton .accompanied
us upon that occasion.

You went to Cock- lane next ?-;-Yes.

Did you go to any other place' that night?
— Yes; I went to Hill's afterwards^ in Bar-
tholomew-close.

You were asked by my learned friend, with
respect to Mr. Crossfield's place of abode; be
lived in Dyer's-huildings? — ^Yes.

Did he Uve in family there?— No, in
lodsings.

Do you remember to have seen Crossfield
about the time Smith, Le Maitre, and Hig-
gins were committed ? — ^I do.

Do you remember to have seen him about
at that time, just as publicly as before ? — Yes,
just thie same.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — ^Was that after
his return from Bristol?— No, before he went
to Bristol.

Mr. Adam, — Did you see him repeatedly
about this time ? — FrequenUy ; I staid in town
but a few dayd before 1 went to Bristol.

Lord Chief Justice Egfre, — ^You went to
Bristol soon after Le Maitre and Smith were
in custody? — Soon after.

Mr. Jdom.— Do you recollect any thing
that passed between you and Crossfield re-
specting this journey to Bristol?-^! know
Crossfield intended to go to Bristol three or
four months before that time, to see whether
it would be an eligible place for him to settie
in as a physician ; and that he intended to
make some experiments upon the Bristol and
Bath watery which he thought might be of
service to him in liis medical capacity.

How long had he this intention before the
time we are speaking of ?— For several months
before.

iS]

$6 <3E0RGB lU.

Trial ofMobeti Thmas Croufidd

[44

How long did you remain at Bristol ?— A
fjBw days.

Ana Crossfield with you?— Yes.

Had you frequent opportunities of seeing
Crossfield at Bristol?— Yes, every dav.

Did he go about publicly?— As publicly as
any man could possibly do.

You left him at Bristol, and he remuned
there sometime? — He remsdned there till the
time when I was first called before the privy
council; he returned to town about that
time.

You saw him then ? — ^Yes, in London.

Did he use any mystery at)out himself, or
bis situation then? — ^No, he did not at the
time when I first saw him ; I never made any
particular inquiries about it.

Do you know at what time be left Lon-
don?— I thmk, the last time I recollect to
have seen him, was on the day I was last
called before the privy council: I was called
three times before the privy council, in a week
or ten days: the last time I saw him was, I
think, in the month of January.

Then Upton being called before the privy
council, when Higgins and Le Maitre were
before the privy council, was in the end of
September?— I think it was in the month of
Seotember.

My learned friend asked you with respect
to his being advertised,, and a reward ofiered
for apprehending him; when did you first see
that r— I cannot speak as to the time when it
appeared ; but this I know, that it was a con-
sioerable time af\er I last saw him, and a
considerable time after I heard that he ifas
ssuled.

Had you ever any conversation with Upton,
with regard to the mstrument ?-^I never had.

Mr. FengHne Pabner re-eiamined by Mr.

Garfcw,

It will be necessary to ask you one or two
questions. You told my learned friend, that
tne last tine you saw Crossfield, was before
he went abroaid ; was it on the day you were
last examined before the privy council, before
he went abroad? — ^Yes.

Where did you see him that day?— At my
own chambers.

That was afler your return from Bristol? —
Yes.

You told him you had been examined be-
fore the privy council ?— Yes.

Have you been examined more than once
by the privy council?— Yes, three times.

Upon which of your three examinations be-
fore the privy councU did you undertake, if
possible^ to find Cros^eldl and to produce
oim before the privy council as a witness?—*
At my first examination* I think, it was.

How often, between yoiir ml and your
third examination, did Crossfield visit your
chambers? — I cannot say.

Was it ddW?— No, it might be once or
twice; when 1 aey once or twice, I do ^t
mean to say that be was no more than twice

at my chambers; I cannot particular^ say
the number of times.

The last time you saw him was on the day
on which you concluded your examlnatioa
before the privy council, atler you had been
examined ? — ^I think it was before I attended
the council.

You saw him, probably, in the early part of
the dav, and went and was examined after-
wards by the privy council? — ^Yes.

There is one other thins I wish to have ex-
plained. You said Crossfield went to Bristol
with a view to see whether that was an eligi-^
ble situation for him to settle in as a physi-
cian; and to try some experiments upon the
Bristol and Bath waters. Did he announce
himself as a physician newly arrived at Bris-
tol, or at Bath? — He did not go to practise as
a physician, he went to see whether Bristol
would be an elijgible situation for him to prac-
tise as a physician.

There is one thing more that may be mis-
taken unless I put a question upon it-^Ia
vour answer to Mr. Adam, you said that
before he went for Bristol, he was publicly
about here in town? — ^Yes.

And, I thiuk, you said that though you
inquired of him, after his return, you never
learned from him where his residence was?
—No.

And you only saw him at your own cham-
btfs?— Certainly ; and the reason he assigned
to me was

Mr. Gamnc, — ^I do not ask your reasons.

Lord Chief Justice JSyre.— It is part of the
explanation.

TFt^neu.— The reason he stated was this—
I told him the circumstance of my being
summoned before the privy council at the
first time; and I acqmunteahim that his at-
tendance was likewise required, he told me
he was engaged to go abroad as the surgeon
of a ship ; uiat he nad no kind of objection
to attend the privy council; but he knew
nothing of the matter then before the council;
and that his staying in town would be Ijie
means of detaming him from going the
voyage.

Mr. Gorrov.^-You explained to him that
the privy council wished much that he should
attend, and tibat you had promised to procure
bis attendance as a witness? — ^Yes.

To which he answered, that knowine no-
thins; of the afiairs that were transacted ther^
and being engaged to go abroad, be should
go, and not continue any longer in town for
that purpose ?-— Yes.

Did you ever commuiucate, in either of
your examinations, to the privy council, that
the gentieman did not attend wcause it was
inconvenient to his a&irs?- My examination
will show that.

Or whether your examination did not close
without the privy council having the least
conoeption, from any thing vou stated to
them, that you knew where to nod Crossfield?
-*I certainly did not know where to find him.

45]

for High Treoion.

A. D. 1796.

[48

John Hi// sworn.*— Examined by Mr. Law.

You are a turner? — ^Ycs.
Where do you livef — In Bartholomew-
close.

What division of the Corresjponding So-
ciety were you a member off — Division six.
Were you acquainted with Upton, in Sep*
tember, 1794 F— I knew him.

Do you know Mr. Palmefi who has just
been examined? — ^Yes.

Do you remember Upton and Palmer com-
ing to your house about that time? — Upton,
Pwner. and another man came to my house
about that time.

September, t794?— Yes.

Do yon remember any question being put
to yoo by Palmer, or that other man, when
they came to vour house at ^te time you
mentioned? — ^Upton asked me if I could
turn in wood, I told him yes ; he asked me if
I would do liim a job, I said yes.

Did he mention any thing about a sketch ?
— ^No; he began to tell me about what sort
of job it wa9 to be— I did not rightly under-
stand, acoordine to what he said to me, what
sort of dung he wanted, but they made a
sketch of it.

Look at this paper, is that the sketch ?—
I think that is the sketch that was produced.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — ^Wasit done in
ink, or with a pencil? — In ink, I believe— I
lent them a pen and ink.

Mr. Xov.— I see there is written on the
other side ** This house to let, inquire within.'^
— ^Was that written on the paper before they
made the sketch upon it?— Yes.

Was that a paper of your's they found at
your house ?-^Yes.

Were all the three persons you have men-
tioned. Palmer, Upton, and the third peMon
to whom you have not given a name, present
when that sketch was orawn?— Yes.

Had you any conversation with them in
which way the , thing that was so sketched
out was to be done?— I asked Upton what it
was for ; he said it was for somethine in the
electrii^ing machine wav; he tola roe to
bring it to his house, and that I should be
paid for it.

Was any thing said how it was to be done?
--^Nothing more than that.

Do you recollect whether- Upton, Palmer,
or the stranger, sketched that out?— The
stranger did something to it, to the best of
my recollection.

Were there more persons than one that
did something to it? — I think I did some-
thing to it.

Under whose direction did you do that
something? — Directions fit>m Upton.

Was tlie whole done between you, Upton,
and the straoger?^^Ye8.

Pahner did no part of it? — I do not recol-
lect that he did.

There is a straight piece— was there any
conversation aboat dorag the straight piece?

— ^I asked what it was for, they said it was
something in the electrifying machine way.

Was it said how the straight piece was to
be done? — It was to be quite straight, like a
round ruler.

Is that [showing the model in wood] one
of the things you made, in conseouence of
that direction, as a round ruler ? — I think it is.

Was that the thing you did as a model for
the brass-work? — ^Yes that locAslike it.

One was to be done in wood-work, the
other in brass* work; you did thi^ as meaning
to conform to the directions contiuned in the
sketch ?*-Yes ; and I took them to Upton's
house, for him to look at them to see if they
were right.

Did the persons who bespoke them order
you to do so ?— Upton ordered me to do so;

Which of them told you you should be paid '
for them? — Upton.

Are you sure it was Upton that told you
that?— Yes.

Are jou sure none of the others mentioned
any thmg about paying for them?— Yes.

Do you remember whom you saw when
you went to Upton's? — ^I saw a man playing
at cards with him; I do not know wno that
man was.

Dki you see Mrs. Upton there? — ^I cannot
recollect whether I did; only I recollect per-
fectly well he was playing at cards with a man.

Was there no woman of the party? — I
think I did see a woman; she came into the
place in the mean time, I think.

And you lef^ these things? — I did.

When did you carry the things to Upton ?
-—About three days after they were ordered.

Do you happen to recollect the day of Sep-
tember when they were ordered?— Towards
the latter end of September, I believe it was.

John Hill cross-examined by Mr. Gumey,

You have stated that you yourself were a
member of the Corresponding Sodety — of
that society Upton likewise was a member?
— Yes he was.

Have you any knowledge of any inquiries that
were going forward at that time in the Cor-
responding Society respecting Upton— were
there any imputations thrown upon Upton's
character in the Corresponding Society?—
There were.

Do you know any of the persons who were
principally concerned in throwing those im-
putations—was Mr. Le Maitre active in that?
->-* I cannot say exactly; Higgins said some-
thing which affronted Upton, when they were
about to investigate his character.

Were you present at any other meeting
when any person whatever brought any charges
against Upton ?

Mr. Law. — I object to that question.

Lord Chief Justice £yr«.— The object of the
examination is, to fix that Upton had, for
some reasons, which they mean to show,
conceived mance against some of those per-
sons.

47] d6 GBOHGE IIL Trial of Robert Thunms CrossfieU

[43

Mr. £av.-*-I submit they are to get at that
object by regular means.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — The means they
proDose is, to show that some of these people
maae some charges against Upton, in conse-
quence of which the former witness said
Upton was disgraced.

Mr. La»»—'i do not object to any thing
that is asked respecting Le Maitre, or any
body by Qame, but the question is put in ge-
neral.

Lord Chief Justice £yre.— In general, un-
less it can be followed by somethmg personal
to some one of these people, it amounts to
nothing; but the examination has already
gone to Le Maitre being one of the persons.
Mr. GurfMy.— I assure your lordsbip I ab-
stained from mentioning the names of any one
pf the prisoners, that it might not be said I }>ut
the words in his mouth ; but as that gives rise
to an objection, I will put my questions more
directly.— -—Do you remember whether,
pending that examination into Upton's cha-
racteri you heard Higgins say any thing in
the society respecting Upton's character ?->-
Upton was going to save the society the tioi^
ble of expeUing nim— he was going[ to take
himself away; with that Higgins said,' there
he hops off': he afironted Upton directly,
because it was casting a reflection upon his
lameness.

Were there, or were there not, expressions,
of violent animosity passing between Le Mai-
tre, Higgins, Smith, and Upton, in the society?
— ^There was some animosity between them,
but I did not particularly notice what it arose
from, nor how it ended.

In point of fact, were Le Maitre, Smith,
and Higgins, pursuing any inquiry into the
character of Upton?— -Not that I know of.

At any time after you had delivered this
mddel to Upton, did he call upon you at your
house, after Le Maitre, Hiegms, and Smith
were apprehended? — After Upton was appre-
hended himself, on the Sunday, he called
upon me.

How long before that had he himself been
taken up? — Only on the Saturday night,
according to his own account.

What did Upton then say to you respecting
Le Maitre ?

Mr. Attorney General. — ^I would just inti-
mate to Mr. Gurney, that I have not offered
any evidence of acts or declarations of Upton,
unless in the presence of the prisoner.

Mr. Gunu^.— -Your lordship has already
observed, the object of my cross-examination
is to prove the animosity in Upton's mind
respecting some of the persons in this indict-
ment, I am going to ask a question to point
out that animosity, by showing something
Upton said conceming^one of those persons.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre.— The difficulty of
the case is, that at present there is nothuig
(properly speaking) from Upton in evidence,
and therefore your showing that Upton had
animosity agamst any of ttiese prisoners, is

rather going before the point; it will be bet-
ter for yon to examine to that, rn case they
can establish any declaration of Upton's which
will be evidence against your client^ then it
will be proper for you to show that Upton had
malice against your cUent.

Mr. Gtimey.^— If your lordship will direct
the witness to retire for a minute, I will state *
the object of my question more particularly^

Mr. Adam.. — I submit to your lordship that
the line of examination Mr. Gurney is now
following up is admissible in the present
stage of the cause. Your lordship will ob-
serve that this indictment lays, as the attor-
ney general has stated, a conspiracy to take
away the life of the king; that there are
counts which contain an allegation of con-
spiracy ; aa^ as the attorney eeneral stated^
there is likewise part of the indictment which
contsdns no allegation of conspiracy : the pri-
soner is broiu|ht up upon the whole of the in-
dictment, andne has pleaded to thewhole of Uie
indictment ; what part of the indictment is to
be submtttCKl to the consideration of the jury
as proved, and what part of the indictment
is to be submitted to the jury as not proved,
it.ia impossible for m&at the present moment
to know. All that I know at present is, that
the prisoner stands indicted with having con-
spired with three others who are known, and
with others who are not known to the grand
jury, for the purpose of taldne away the fife of
the king; and it is particularly alleeed in the
different overt acts, with regard to the prepa-
ration of this instrument which is supposed to
be made for that particular purpose, and with
regard to the consultations supposed to have
been had among the parties, that this Upton,
whom my learned fnend has stated to be ia
the other world, and whom therefore he can-
not produce as a witness — ^that Upton is not
only one of the principal conspirators, but the
material one ; and not only so, hut that this
instrument was delivered to him for the parti-
cular purpose stated in the different overt acts:
what I wish to call the attention of the Court
to is this, Upton then appears upon the face of
the charge to bo a person whose name, whose
character, whose mind, whose demeanoiu*,
whose intention, with regard to these parties
is necessarily implicated, and therefore I think
it follows, as a necessary consequence, that
when a witness is brought bv the prosecution
from whom the counsel for the prisoner ima-
gine they can derive intelligence with regard
to Upton's animosity, and the nature of his
mind, they are entitied to give such colour
and such appearance to the character of that
person, who evidentlv is a principal actor
according to the evidence before the Court
as will fairly tend to exculpate the prisoner ;
for your lordship observes, in every step that
has been taken^ throughout all the peregrina-
tion in the different streets to the different
brass founders — that throughout the whole
Upton has been the foremost man ) and there-
fore I contendi that^ as the whole seems to

491

fiut Higjk Treatan*

A. D. 1796*

[50

have iestied from Upton^ iA Upton la named
upon Ibe record, your lordships and the jury
have to try his conduct and his cuAaACTEs :
but, above ally I contend that that which my
learned friend is examining to, namely, the
animosity of UptoOy is a fit subject for exami«
nation ; and wnatever makes out that animo-
sity, which shows that any of the persons
charged with this conspiracy could not con-
spire with Upton, on account of the animosity
in which they lived, is primA/acie ground for
our examination ; we ao mean, if we are un-
der the necessity of goin^ into our case, to
give your lordship sucn evidence in chief; but
at present, if the crown bring a witness from
whom we imagine we can prove that fact,
all we claim of the Court is, to be allowed to
do it now.

Mr. Gamfy.— Perhaps it would exclude all
objection if I were to state the exact object of
the question I was proposing : — ^it is, to prove
an attempt of Upton to suborn Hill to swear,
before the privy council, that Le Maitre was
the person who called upon him with
Palmer when he received the order for these
models.

Mr. Attorn^ GeneroJ. —I rise for the pur-
pose of stating to your lordship, that I do not
tjpel an J anxiety with respect to what the Court
may think proper to direct upon this subject
It was in consequence of an mtimation siven
by me, that vour lordship had the trouble of
lieartng any discussion upon it ; because, when
Mr. Gurney was putting a (juestion respects
ing a declaration of Upton's in the absence of
the prisoner,! thought it mv duty to intimate
to him that I had cautiously and studiously
abstiuned from asking any question, with
respect to any declaration or act of Upton,
where I have not evidence to offer that the pri-
soner was one of the persons present : I have
no objection to its being taken in any way
Mr. Gurney chooses to state, that .Upton had
as' much animosity as possible against Hig-
gins, Le Maitre and others; what I state is
2iis^ that the declarations of Upton never can
be evidence in a case of this sort, uqless we,
on the other hand, had given some evidence
of the declarations of Upton, with respect to
the party now at the bar. Mr. Adam says
that Upton is stated upon this record to have
conspired with these persons ; that is not the
fact ; we are to prove the conduct of the pri-
soner; having uone that, it must be not by
the declarations of Upton, but by evidence,
independent of these declarations, that the
purpose and intention of his mind must be
proved to be such as is charged upon thb re-
cord.

Mr. Xav.— There is no one charse of a con--
spiracy with Upton through the wnole of the
indictment, nor is his name mentioned as a
conspirator; we have not attempted to give
any evidence of any acts of Upton but in the
presence of Palmer, and ft third person, whom
we have shown tobe ^ prisoner : if we had
given evidence of declarations of his at adis»

VOL. XXV^

tinct and detached time, it would have open-
ed a door to this evidence. — If it is fit to ask
thisquestion, we submit we should be at li-
berty to go into declarations of the same man
Upton.

Mr. Garrom. — ^It seems to me, that the
very manner in which it may be insisted that
this is a proper examination, goes to demon-
strate it cannot be proper in this stage of the
cause : I am aware there is a stage of the
cause, as has been hinted, when this maj^ by
possibility become competent evidence : it is
as it is opened, to show the animosity of Up-
ton : ana from whence the learned gentlemen
state that they mean to infer, first, that Up-
ton could not bv any possibility or probability
conspire with those with whom he was in a
state of constant animosity, and that probably
he was of course not conspirine with them
but against them. Now I could understand
the application and the importance of this
argument, and the examination, if the course
the attorney jgeneral had taken had been this
instead of charging and laying before your
lordship the acts of the prisoner now at the
bar, and his acts alone, or the acts of others
when in his company and presence, the at-
torney general had given in evidence either
the acts of Upton when alone, and when he
might have been actuated by animosity against
any of these )>ersons, or declarations of his
when he might have been actuated by the
same animosity ; to repudiate all those acts
of Upton, to get rid of the impression of all
these assertions and declarations of Upton, so
circumstanced, I could easily imagine the ex-
treme importance of showing that Upton had
declared ne had set about doing this with a'
view to injure others, but it seems to me that'
that can by no means be evidence at present.

Mr. Adam, — ^Your lordship will favour me
with a few words in reply. Your lordship
will observe what the nature of the question
is that is proposed to be put, for it is only by
referring to the particular question that your-
lordship can judge of the propriety or impro-

Eriety of putting it; the Question my learned
lend proposes to put is tnis, whether in point
of fact Upton did upon a certain dav, ana at a
certain time, after tne discovery of this sup-
posed conspiracy — ^whether he did or did not
endeavour lo' get the witness at the bar to
make a false accusation against Le Maitre,
one of the persons accused of this conspiracy.
Now your lordship will observe, that that is a
question which does not go to Uplon*s gene-
ral declarations — which does not go to hts ge-'
neral demeanour — which does not even go to
establish an universal prevailing animosity in
the mind of Upton, but it goes to establish
this clear and distinct point, that there exist-
ed in the mind of Upton either such an ani-^
mosity, or such a desire of self-preservation,
that he was determined to get a person to lay
the whole blame upon, in order that he might
either escape harmless, or possibly that he
might wreak his vengeance upon the per-<

51]

S6 GEOKGE lU.

Trial o

TiomatCnaffidd

iSt

son who had ofietided him^ against whom
he had an animosity : and I contend thit, as
this is an indiclroent for a conspiracy to take
away the life of the king, and as in that Upton
is mentioned by name as one of the persons
employed to nudce this particular instrument
and as he is brought forward as a particalar
character in this transaction, my friend is en«
titled to defend the prisoner by an examina-
tion into the attempts of Upton to suborn
this roan to perjury against one of the persons
indicted for thb conspiracy.

Lord Chief Justice JByiv.— I doubt whether
the fact (if dbtinctly proved) that Upton had
done any thing that marked animosity, or that
ke had made such a dechration as this, can,
in any stage of the cause, when one comes to
tonsidrr it, be admitted; I will not pronounce
a positive opinion upon that, because I do nol
know exactly what will be the course of the
evidence, or what ultimately we may think
fit to receive, which may let m these declara-
tions. At present it is not receivable, because
they are declarations not upon oath— declarar
tioBs not upon oath of a man dead, not under
those circumstances which place it upon the
£M)tifig pf an oath; and therefore whatever
Vf ton may have said is not in its own nature
evidence, and consequently cannot be re-
ceived, unless in one particular case, and that
is where it is argumaUum ad hominem^ by wa^
of taking off the credit of any thing the wit^
Bess had said at another time upon his oath,
there it mw be gone into, though not upon
oath ; for if a man is upon oath in one story,
and makes a declaration before or sfbsr of a
dmrcnt kind, this will take off from the cre-
dit of that testimony ; otherwise, in the nature
of the things Upton's declaration is no evi^
dence at aU.

Mr. Garrov.-— I now propose to call John
LeBretton.

Mr. Adam,-^! should be obliged to my
iriend to state to what points he proposes to
examine this witness.

Mr. Qarroa, — I call this witness to two
ihcts, both of which, as it appears to us, are
of considerable importance; the first is to the
time and manner of the flight of the prisoner,
after this accusatioB was made known against
Upton; the next is, to his distinct declarations
of the share of the guilt he had in this trans-
action.

Mr. Adam.'^VLj friend has slated that the
piiticipal point to which he means to call Uiis
witness, is to the declaiations of the prisoner
with respect to his participatioD id tne guili
of this transaction. If my learned friend has
any particular fact, that is a different (juestion,
and I have no objections at all to his calling
I« Bretton to prove tliat fact ; but if he means,
afler he has proved that particular fact, to go
on to examine Le Bretton to declarations of
the prisoner, I then have to submit to your
lordship, with great humility, but I think with
great confidence, that your lordship, when you
eome to consider the situation of this prose-

c'utioar, wili bo of opinion, ti»t there if no
ground whatever for admitlhiff such evidence
of declaration.^— >First of aU permit me to
state to the Court how I imderstand the facts
in this case to stand ; seoondlyi permit me to
state to the Court^^

Mr. Oarrow, — ^I was going to submit to my
friend's judgment, whether it would not bo
more proper to wait till I had exhausted that
to which my friend feels no objection;
because it is not impossible that in the first
part of my examination of this witness I ntar
remove a part of m^r friend's objection. — I
mean to show the distinct fact of his flight.

Lord Chief Justice £ffre. — But you must
first show the carnui delkti. Does this man
fly because he ana two other persons went into
a brass founder's shop, or a turner's shop, and
ordered instruments of a particular description
•—what then ? If there was an examination
before the privy council — what then? What
all this means at present I know nothing of^
nor can the Jury know any thing of it ; you
must first of all show that in somebody this
was an of&nce, and you may, for aught I
know, show it by the very medium of tlio
evidence which you propose to call, but then
you must be^n at the other end of it; thero
IS a possibility that yw might give a sense
and a meaning to this obsctire mh) unintelli-
gible evidence which we have had already, that
may connect and apply it to the particular
charge, hot at present 1 should say^ we have
heard a great oeal about a turner's shop, and
a brass founder's shop^ and it is all nothing.

Mr. Garrov.-. Your lordship must be aware
that the attorney-general would not have left
this case as it is brought now.

Lord Chief Justice %re.— Certainly not

Mr. Omrtow, — We are now going to give
those facts the sokitioB which the Court i»
asking for.

Mr. Ji/om.— The only mbfortone I labour
under is, that the train of my thoughts ha»
suffered some degree of interruption from my
learned friend ; not, I am sure, with any in-
tention of that 'sort, because I always experi«
ence kindness and civility from him. I wilt
endeavour to recover the train in which I was*
proceeding as well as I can.

Lord Chief Justke l^e.— What are we
about P Mr. Adam do you mean to say that
the prisoner's confossion of his guil^ if any
such thing happened, Is not to be given i»
evidence against him, out of his own mouth f

Mr. Justice GnMe.— What he has said per^
baps is respecting tbepurpMe for which these
things were ordered^

Mr. Adam, — Will your lordship permit me
to stat^ the srounds upon which a mean to
address myself to your lordship: — I was en->
deavouring to draw your lordship's attenUon
to the nature of the fkcu, and to the mannep
in which these facts were proved, and then to
ask your lordship whether there was, accord-
ing to the proof that now lies before the Court,,
any evidence whatever, i» a prosecution for %

53]

^ Higk Treamn.

A. D. 17S6.

1*4

cfime of this sorl, that could entitle my iriends
to give in evidence these declarations, and
these confessions ; and I found my observa-
tioa in the nature of this prosecution, and the
kv of h4gh treason. My ft-ieud, the atlomey
eeaeral has stMed, with great correctness,
thai there must be an overt act laid in the
indictmeni; that that overt act must be proved
act by one witness but by two, unless there
aie two overt acts of the same kind, and then
one oEiay be proved 1^ on^ and another by
another witness. What is the nature of the
evidence already given f — Your lordship has
had given in evidence, as I staled it before—
aot with a view of stating it in any way but
a perfectly grave one— a per^ination of three
persons from one brass^founder's shop to
another, and then to a turner's shop; your
lordship has it in evidence, that where any
thing was nude, the prisoner had no earthly
conoesion with the onier.

Mr. OtuTom, — He expressly assisted in
directing the model.

'ilt. AiUm.^^he first witness called was
Dowding ; that witness did say he believed
tb«r all assented, but that Upton alone spoke :
at that |4ace nothing was oone of any sort.
Xh^ then went to another brass fi>under*s,
where nothing was done. They then went
to a third, where nothing was done. Then,
aAerwards, they came to the tumer*8| where
there were directions given to make a parti*
cular thing, in a particular form, in wood.^^
Now, what J contend before your lordship is
thisy that to that &ct there is but one wit-

Lord Chief Justice Ifre^^To what fact ?

Mr. Adam^r-^o the fact of makiog that
model which lies upon the tableland the only
witness to that fact is the last witness who
was examined; because ^our lordship will
observe, that whatever opmion your lordship
may have of Mr. Palmer'9 evidence, he has
not spoken positively to any one part of the
traasaetioD; and it is perfectly certain, that
whatever passed when Mr. Palmer was there,
was never carried into execution at all; and,
therefore, as &r as Mr. Palmer's evidence
goes, he does not advance one iota beyond
9ie position in which the evidence stands
with regard to the brass founders, namely,
an inchoate direcjtioB, but which inchoate
direction is not even proved specifically to be
^ven by the prisoner, and certainly there is
nothii^ proved to have been executed in con-
aequence of that Inchoate direction. Now
what is the overt act. if there is anv ? — it is
ainoly the making that model : then the
maJfw^ that mode^ if it is an overt act suf-
ficient to entitle your Iprdship to admit the
evidence of declaration and of confession,
upon the part of the prisoner, is an overt act
proved merely by one witness; therefore, I
contend upon that groundL accordii^ to the
'ibnn of proceeding m hign treason, that it is
jinmossilNe for tbini^ wi^iout havhig estab-
lished that overt act clearly and omiifestjy,

by llic evidence of two witnesses, to found any
thing that can advance one iota in proof of
the guilt of the prisoner ; and I stale that con-
fidently upon this ground, because if it were
in your lordship's breast to admit the overt
act to be proved by a single witness, and after-
wards to admit the declarations of the pri«
soner, to give colour to the use of that instru*
meat; you, in point of fact, send to tlie jury
a question to try, with respect to treason,
where tlie foundation, that is to say that which
establishes the corpm delictij is* established
by one witness only, and not by two as the
law requires. — I contend, therefore, upon that
ground, that if your lordship is of opinion
with «e, that I have statea tliat evidence
correctly, that the onlv overt act, if it be an
overt act, is the making that model, that
that overt act is proved only by one witness;
and consequently, according to the rules of
prooeediog m high treason, Uie Court have it
not in their powen and the Court ought not —

L. C. J. £yr<.— You are rig^t, what they
ought not, they have it not in their power to do.

Mr. Ad^m, — Hitherto I have arjgiied upon
the idea, that there has been sufficient colour
given to the nature of that model, the only
overt act proved, the only thing proved to be
done (lor that is the meaning of an overt act)
that tends to infer an attempt to take away
the life of the king: your lordship will con-
sider whether any colour is given to it or
not; and then your lordship will consider
this whether in point of fact if your lord-
ship thinks there is no particular colour <ir
complexion given to this, that takes it out
of tlie fiitUBtion of a common instrument for a
mere matter of mechanical curiosity, you will
admit confessional evidence in order to give
that colour and appearance to it. Iconiend,
that that which now lies before the Court,
according to the evidence which has been
given a^t it, stands in a utuation in ita
nature perfectly indifferent : it may have beeOi
for augnt I know, meant for a veiy bad pur*
pose. It may have been meant for a veijr
good purpose, it may have been meant for a
purpose perfectly indifierent, most undoubt-
edly I am entitled to put all these aupposi-
tiona< — ^Now 1 ask in a criminal case of this
sort, with evidence in the nature of confes*
siooal evidence, about which I am sure I will
not trouble your lordship at any length in the
present stMO of this business, bemise your
lordship is better aware of the nature of that
evidence than any thmg, I can say, can make
you a^pare of it-— I ask wheUier yoiir lordship
thinks, in a criminal proceeding of this sor^
where the thing done is proved only as I have
atated it, where it is not proved lo he done
with any jpartkuhir ook)ur,-«-I ask, I say, whe*
ther, Mntu o^our is given to it, by some such
ovidenoe as tends to prove an overt act, out
of the n^oirth of witnesses that have cecMved
it, or are supposed to receive it from the mouth
of the prisoner, your lordship thinks it right
loadoitit.

55]

36 6B0R6E III.

Trud of Robert thmat Qrot^iM

im

_ . ' •

The nature of confessional evidence is this,
that undoubtedly it is good or bad, according
to the situation and circumstances under which
it is given ; and if your lordship permits con-
fessional evidence to be given, does it not
amount to this, that your lordship is allowing
the words and declarations of a prisoner, not
to a particular fact, hut to the intent? if the
words and declaration of the prisoner are to
be proved upon this occasion, they do not go
to prove an identical fact, but they ^o to
prove a particular intent or a particular
dis]>osition of the mind. — ^Now to apply that
again to the situation of this case, to the
colour that is given to the use to which that
instrument was meant to apply, I must then
ask humbly, but most firmly, whether your
lordship thinks, that in this stage of the cause,
without going farther, it is possible for my
friends to ^ive the confessional evidence of
the declarations of the prisoner in this case ?
'—above all, I submit that this instrument
produced, is the only overt act proved, that
It is proved only by one witness, and conse*
quentty that they do not stand in a situation
to show the mind of the prisoner, till they
have established most clearly and indisputablv
this overt act, either by two witnesses, or till
they shall have given such colour and com-
plexiou to it, as to entitle your lordship to
think evidence of confession admissible, as
confirmatory and corroborator^^. Your lord-
ship knows the doctrine of evidence of con-
fession ; there was a time when it was merely
treated as corroborative evidence, though of
late it has been admitted.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre.— Whether there
is anv rule of law, which reouires that there
should beacertain quantitv or colour ofcharge
proved in evidence before theCk>urtcan receive
the confession of the prisoner ?

Mr. Gumey, — My lord, I "am about to
cite an authority which I conceive will fur-
nish an answer to your lordship's question ;
but I will first bef to state what evidence the
crown has ofiereo in support of thb indict-
ment. The attorney general has not yet
stated the overt act, to which he intends to
apply his evidence; but, I suppose, the overt
act intended to be supported oy it is the se-
cond, in which it is stated, that the prisoner,
and others, did employ and engage John Hill,
to make two pieces of wood, to foe used as
models for the making and forming certain
parts of an instrument, to be usea for the
traitorous purpose charged in the indictment.

Now of any concern which tlie prisoner
may be sud to have had in that direction, I
submit to your lordship that we have the tes-
timony but of one witness; the identity of
Crossfiekl, even as beine present when tnese
directions were given, nas been spoken to
only by Palmer— Hill has not spoken to the
identity of Cros&field, or any othev person
whatever, but Upton, and Palmer. The
authority I allude to is this, in Mr. Justice
Foster's discourse upon the subject of high

treason, page 941 : ^* In the cate of Francis
Willis, the counsel for the crown called a
witness to prove what the prisoner had said to
him touching the shuv he had in the treason
he then stood charged with.— The prisoner's
counsel objected to this sort of evidence, and
insisted, that by this act no confession, ex-
cept it be made m open court, shall be ad-
mitted in evidence ; but the jjudges present
were very clear that such confession is evidence
admissible, proper to be left to a jury, and
will go in corroooration of other evidence to
the overt acts ; though it might be still a dis-
putable point, whether a confession out of
court, proved by two witnesses, is of itself
sufficient to convict. — ^Upon this last point
none of them, except chief baron Ward, deli-
vered any direct opinion, his words are ' A
' confession shall not supply the want of a wit-
' ness, there shall be two witnesses to the
' treason notwithstanding; but to say it shall

* not be given in evidence, there is no ground

* for it.' The attorney-general (sir James'
Montague) admitted, that two witnesses are
necessary, besides the confession. The solicitor
(sir Robert Eyre) is more explicit, and salth,

< he (the prisoner) shall not be convicted on a

* trial without two lawful witnesses, that is
' the thing provided for. It was to exclude

< a precedent that had been settled in ToUg's

* case (the case already cited from Kelyne and

* Hale), but it was not desipied to exclude all
' confessions: That was evidence at law, and
' always must be so. The design of the act
' was to exclude confessmns from having the

* force of a conviction unless it were in a court
' of record ; and to prevent a confession proved
' by two witnesses from being a sufficient

* ground for a conviction.' "*

I submit that this is a direct and positive
authority, that there must be two witnesses to
treason, previous to' the production of any
corroborative evidence.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre.— To put an end to
this objection, it will be sufficient to observe,
that even upon the reasoning of the counsel
for the prisoner, this evidence ought to be ad-
mitted, for here are two witnesses, and more
than two to the very overt act that is now in-
sisted upon, in the way in which the prisoner's
own counsel put it; iot unquestionably it
being proved that these three piersons were
all together at HilFs, and a itlodel having
been there made, and approved of by one, at
least, and they all present, it is a question
for the jury, whethertbose who were present,
and who did not express particblltr marks of
approbation, did dr not concur in it : and if
they did concur in it, there are three witnesses
to the overt act ; but if it were not so it may
be a good bbjection to make, in a iiitufl) stage
of the cause, that there is but one i^toess to
any one overt-act of high treason, allil thai
this confesuonal evidence, upon your rule,

« See the uial of Fiancis Willis, aniif Vol.
16, p. 6^,

57]

/or High TriOion.

A. D. 1796.

[58

wUl DOt nipplf the want of another witness;
that- may |KMisibly be, but the use of the con*
fessiunal evidence is at present to make the
first part of the evidence intelligible^ which
it is not, nor do I know it ever will be ; but
kmay, perhaps, appear from these detlara-
tioos of the prisoner, whether the prosecutor's
evidence can be rendered intelligible or not,
eut of the mouth of the prisoner — the autho*
nty cited shows, that the prisoner's confession
is to be received in explanation, and corrobo«
ration of the evidence offered, and it may be
offered upon the ground of there being already
two witnesses to the overt act insisted upon ;
but I am of opinion, that it misht be offered
if but one witness at present nad appeared,
because another witness, afVer they have made
tfiis evidence intelligible, may come and give
other evidence of another branch of the overt
act; there is no rule of law which says, that
you shall establish the overt act by the evi-
dence of two witnesses first, before you shall
hear any confessional evidence, and that is
the only question in the cause. t .

Joku Le Brctton swom.-^Ezamined by Mr.

Garrom,

You sdled from Falmouth, I understand,
ca board the Pomona ? — ^Yes.

What were you ? — Boat-steerer.

Wtiat was the Pomona?— A South Sea
whaler.

You sailed from Falmouth, on the 13th of
February, 1T95 f— We did.
• Where were you bound to?— The Southern
fishery, round Cape Horn.

Do you know the prisoner, Crossfield ? — I
do.

How long before you sailed, had you seen
bim f — He came on board our ship about a
week before we sailed from Portsmouth.

Can you tell us at what time he did sail
from Portsmouth ?— On the S9th or SOth of
January, I cannot say which.

In what character did he come on board?
— As surgeon.

By what name did he pass, from the time
he came on board at Portsmouth till you
i»ailed? — By the name of '' the doctor,'' as is
most commonly used on board a ship.

Did you understand that to be a description
of bis profession as doctor ? — ^Yes.

Did you know in name at that time?— I
did not.

liord Chief Justice jEjfre. — ^I>oyou receive
men in this situation, without having their
name taken down ?

Wiinesi* — ^The captain might have his name
taken down, but I did not know his name.

Mr. Garrow. — You sailed on the 13th ? —
Yes.

On the t5th you were taken by a French
corvette called La Vengeance?— -Yes.

And were carried into Bre8t?«-Ves.

You arrived there on the 33rd?— We did, to
tihe best of my knowledge.

Until after you were captured by the French

corvette, had you ever heard, fnm the pri-
soner, what his name was, or heard him calU
ed by anv description but ** the doctor ?''—
Not until we arrived at Brest.

What name did he then assume? — ^He
wrote his own name in the list that was to be
sent on shore, ** Robert Thomas Crossfield.''

Were you shifted before you went into
Brest? — Part of us were taken into the
Frenchman.

Did the prisoner or you go in the first num-
ber that went out of the English ship into the
French ship?— The prisoner went in the first
number.

Do you recollect any expression of the
prisoner, when he went over the ship's
side? — Yes ; as he was going over the side, lie.
wished me and the chief-mate good by,
saying, ** he was happy he was going lo
France, he would sooner go there than to
England."

When you arrived at Brest, dkl you find the
prisoner there? — Yes; on board the same
corvette that had taken us.

After you had gone with your ship inti»
Brest, were you put on board the same ship
with him ? — ^The Pomona - was turned adrift;
and we were taken into the same corvette as
they were in.

By what name did he pass in France ? — His
own name in the muster list.

Were yon mustered frequently ? — ^Yes.

What was the conduct of the prisoner on
board the Pomona, before he was captured? —

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — If you mean to
apply it to this narticumr subject, very well;
but as to any other misconduct of any other
kind-
Mr. Garrotn^ — I mean to prove what was
his conduct before he was taken, and then
to contrast it with his conduct en tins parti«
cular subject

Lord .Chief Justice Eyre.^Bui I think,
there ought to be nothing given in evidence
against the prisoner, that may operate to his
disadvantage, tmtil you have fixed something
upon him to which that ha^ a relation; tiu
then it is all prejudice.

Mr. Garrow. — ^Then I must transpose the
evidence.— After you had arrived at Brest,
did you hear the prisoner make use of any
expressions, with respect to his majesty the
kins of England ; or as to any share he had
haa in any matter which related to hb ma-
jesty?— Yes, Idid.

Be so good as state very deliberately whal
they were ? — I heard him say, he was one of
those who invented this air-gun, to oitignatc
his majesty— to shoot his miyesty.

Did you put any questkm in consequence
of his saving that? — ^Yes, I asked him what
it was like ; he told me the arrow was to go
through a kind of tube by the force of in«
flammable air.

Did he describe the arrow ?— -Yes ; he de-
scribed it like one of our harpoons, which we
kill whaks with.

M]

96 6E0K6E III.

Trial of Robert Thomcu €roiifield

[SO

The harpoon is a barbed instjumeDt?*—

Did he explain the proDerties of die barbs
of the arrow, that was to oe used for this pur-
pose f — ^I do not rightly recollect any farther
than that.

State any otlier expressions vou heard from
I)im relative to the same sabject, or relative
to the king of Bngland, during his imprison*
ment there ?— I do not rightly recollect.
. Did be use those expressions you hsire
mentioned, once, or more than once? — ^I
heard him talk of the gun several times.
* This was a conversation with yourself?—
Chiefly with mvself.

Do you recollect any songs that he sung ?

Mr. ildani.-*Doe8 your lordship tiunk that
b evidence.

. Mr. Garroth^l mean to state that they
vere seditious.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — I think you bad
l>etter forbear that examination.

Mr. Carron, — ^You told us you found him
at Brest, by the name of Crossfield — How
long did you oontiaue in prison at Brest^ the
prisoner passing by the name of Crossfield ?— •
Till we came awi^.

In what manner were yoti to be brought
irom Brest to this country ? — By a cartel
irhich«ame from the West Indies.

When the cartel was ready, and you were
about to beicansferred into that| what name
did the prisoner assume ?— The name of** H.
Wilson.''

Who made out the muster list for the pur-
pose of transferxine you from the French ship
into the other ? — He was one himself.

Had he acted at all as muster master ?-«
l9ot at ally any Englishman used to write
the names — he stood at the gang- way. and
pat the?people's names down, and he putdown
nisown name ** H* Wilson/' the fint or se-
caodname.

Did you hear the persons called over
according to the list? — We had not the
muster fist called over; I saw that wrote
)nit.

Did he embark in the cartel by the name
of Wilson ?**He did.

The ship out of which Crossfield was taken
was the Pomona ?— >It was.

Was he described in the list as H. Wilson
of the Pomona or as of any other ship ? —
As of--'' the Hope."

Mr. Adam. — ^Your lordship observes the
witness ia now giving parol leatimony of a
wriiing.

Lora Chief Justice Eyrv^^-This paper I
apprehend oi^ht to be in some public office ?

Mr. AUgrn^Gesteral^li is left in France.

Mr. ^flw^-Do you know what became of
4hal muster list.

. WifncH,-^ do not; I bielieve it goes to the
representative of Brest

Mr. Gamw.*-Was any profesdoii de-
acribed ?— It was ** IL Wilson, of the H^^^ a
passenger takexi by the same vessel**

Did you hear any other disrespectlul or
seditious expressions from the prisoner^ re-
specting his m^esty, that you recollect,
while you were at Brest f-^ So not recollect
any others.

lord Chief Justice jEyr«.-^The whole is,
he absconded; and when he waste return to
England, he assumed a feisned name. I do not
think his not being a loyal subject is evidence
against him upon this case.

John Le Breitim cross-examined by Mr.

Adam*

Do you know any thing of yeur own know,
jedge with respect to the maaaer in vrhich
this muster list is disposed of ?-*X canaol
tell.

For any thing you know, this master list is
sent over to the Admiralty of Englaod?— It
may be for what I know.

Are you sure you i«ad this mueler list with
attention, at the time you have been speaking
to ? — I am sure that 1 both saw and read it
over. ,

And you can charge your memory cor-
rectly at this distance of tune with what you
have stated ? — ^Yes;

What was your aituatioa on board the
Pomona ?— BoaU«teerer.

What was the number of the Pomoiia'a
crew ?— Twenty-tbiec^ I think, the eaplun
included ?

What was the oipUnn's namef^-Charles
Clarke.

Did be continue a prisoner in France with
you all the time ?— lie did.

Did he come back in the same cartel ship
with you to England ?— ^He did.

Have you seen him frequent^ sbnce yoii
came back to England ? — ^I did a good while
since.

How long since ?— Never «nce last Christ-
mas.

Were you examined before th^ privy coun*
pil upon this busincsa ? — I^was.

Was captain Clarke examined before the
privy council ? — ^I believe he was not

Did he attend at the time you attended ? —
Not at the privy council he cud not.

Have you seen him since your examinatioii
before the privy council?— xes.

W here ?— In London.

in what particuUrfdaoe?— Atthe sdicitor's.
Mr. White's.

Have you ever seen liim in sny^&er (dace?
—Yes.

Where ?— On board his ship.

Have you never seen him at any house on
the banks of the rwer Thames ?-4 have i^
his lodgings in Wanping.

Where were his lodgings in Wapping?^-iB|y
Gun-dock.'

Who is the landlady of the lodfdngs at
Wapping?r^I do not rightly lacollect the
name.

Should you recollect th^ name if it mem
OM^Md ttf^ou ?*»f fhoald.

61]

Jar High Treaiotti

A. D. 1796.

[89

Ilisnot a vevymicaniiiioa name, joa know?
— -I de not know for thaL

Was the name W bite?— No.

Thoropaon f — No.

Waa it WUllamion ?--No.

Was it Smith ? — No, it was not.

Hts landlady's name then is not Smith f
•—Not at the last time be came to London*

But since your return from captivity, have
you seen him at Mrs. Hmitb's at Waufnng^
— Yes ; 1 was there once or twice witn him,
bat he did not lodee there.

Do you know Ars. Smith of Wapping? —
No farther than just by calling there with
him*

WbcD waa it you saw l^im two or three
times at Mrs. Smith's P— At the time he was
fitting bb shipu out, after bis return from

Had you any conversation with him at that
tiane upon this subject? — I cannot rightly say
that I had.

Tbeo if any body were to come and sa^
that you had conversation with him upon this
subject at Mrs. teiith's at Wappin^ since
your return from France^ they must ofcourse
not be speaking truth ?— No; I do not know
that they coul<n

Then for any thing that you recollect, you
may had had conversation with him at Mrs.
Smiih'a atWappingP— I might have talked
to him.

I am not asking you about general conver-
satioa; but whether you talked about Mr.
Crossfield the prisoner ?-^l do not recollect.

Your recollection is irery accurate to the
words Mr. Crossfield spoke, and to words you
read in a paper, and both those things hap«
pened a ^nat while before this meeting at
Mrs. Smith's at Wapping. I ask you, upon
•yiHir oath, do you not recollect any conversa-
tion you had with captain Clarke at Mrs.
Smith's at Wapping, since you came back
firom France, upon the subject of Mr. Cross-
fieid and upon this accusation f — I do not.

Will you positively take upon yourself to
jMar you never had any?— 'No farther than
I told him I had t>een eiamined before the
privv council.

Then now you recollect that you had been
examined before the privy council, and that
you told him so? — Yes.

In consequence of your telling him that
you hadK>een esaminea at the pnvy council,
did nothing farther pass relative lo Mr. Cros^*
fiekl?--No,itdidnol.

Did you not ask htm whether he had not
overheard Mr. i^rossfield say such and such
ivords upon the subject f— No, I did not.

I put It to you again, and recollect that you
are upon yoiir oath. You say you do not re-
collect having had any couvermtton with
csiptain Clarke about what captain Clarke
must have overhead pass between vou and
Mr. Crossfield, upon the subject of this accu-
aation?~No, I did not.

at Mrs. Smith's nor any where

t

else, since your return from France, nor since
your examination at the privy council?— I did
not ; nor captain Clarke never was so inqui*
sitive as to ask me.

Nor were you so communicative as to tell
him ?-^No.

How oAen might you see captain Clarke
at Mrs. Smith's .^—I do not know that I called
there with him abbv^ two or three times.

Is he your captain now ? — Yes.

Where is he now? — He may bo on the
coast of Africa for aught I know.

How lone is it since be left England $^At
Christmas last.

When did you return from France ?— I be-
lieve we landed the 1st or end of September^
I cannot say for a day or two.

I think you told us Mr. Crossfield came on
board the ship at Portsmouth ? — I did.

And that you sailed upon the 13lh finom
Falmouth?— Ves 2 ^nd were taken upon the
15th.

What day did you sail from Portsmouth ?—
On the S9th or 3dth, I cannot say which.

How long had Crossfield been at Ports*
mouth before you sailed ? — He came on board
us about a week beibre we sailed.

And you knew him by the name of ^ the
doctor;" for aught you know your captain
might have known his real name? — Ho
might*

Durine the time that the ship lay at Ports->
mouth, before she sailed from St. Helen's,
were you frequently in company with Mr.
Crossfield?— At meal times.

Did you ever come on shore with him ?-^
He was on shore two different evenings with
me, at Portsmouth.

Who came on shore besides him and you?
•>->The boat's crew.

How many might that boat* s crew consist
off — Five men.

Did you come on shore together F-^Yes.

Did you go to places of puMic resort?— Nou

Mr. Crossfield went publicly about the
streets with you ?— >Yes«

This was m the month of January ?— Yes.

You were driven into Falmouth? — We
went into Falmouth.

What was the ship loaded with?— Cask»
of water, and provisions for the voyage.

Do you mean to say upon your oath, that'
casks of water and provisions for the voyage,
were all that the captain and the ship's crew
had laid in, for the purpose of trafficking to
the South Seas? — No.

What was there besides?— The captain's
private trade.

What did that consist of ?— I cannot say.

Had not you private trade of your own ?— •
Nothing but two dozen pair of stockings.

Did not the private trade of the captain'
and the crew consist of jewellery, trinkets,
watches^ and other articles.^ — He had some*
thing of that kind.

And to a considerable value ? — Yes^ I be<
lieve he had.

8S]

36 GfiOilGE HL

Trial qf Robert TAofftOf Croufield

[64

You put into Falmouth by ttreis of wea-
ther?—Bv the wind getting on to the west-
ward, and we were a&aid to stay at sea, on
account of the French. •

What day did you put into Falmouth ?— I
believe it was the Snd of Februaryy I can*
not say rightly for the day, having lost tiay
journal.

You sailed the iMi, and renuuned ten or
eleven days at Falmouth ?-^Yes.

Did you remain some time In the harbour?
— ^We went to the Roads.

Were you frequently on shore P — ^Yes.

Was Mr. Crossfield frequently on shore at
Falmouth? — He was never on shore more
than once, if he was that.

That you are positive to? — ^Yes.
Were you on shore with him at that time ?«—
I cannot say that I was.

You cannot tell how long he remained 6n
shore ?---I do not know that he was on shore
at all; if he was on shore, it was not more
than once.

If you do not know that he was on shore,
you cannot take upon yourself to say any
thingaboutit?— No, I cannot tell whether
he was on shore or not, because I do not
know any thing about it.

You sailed upon the 13th, and were cap-
tured upon the 15th?— Yes.

As soon as you were captured, were you all
put on board the corvette r — ^No.

How lone was it before vour being put on
board the French ship, alter your capture,
and being carried into Brest?— From the 15th
totheSSrd.

During that time, what sort of weather had
you ? — Pretty moderate for the Ume of year.

How many English prisoners were there of
you altogether on board that ship ?— There
were none but our ship's crew at first.

Do you recollect any scheme upon the part
of your ship's crew to take possession of the
French ship? — ^Yes, I do.

Who was concerned in that scheme?— We
were all concerned in it, as far as I know.

Captain Clarke was concerned? — ^He was.

You were concerned? — ^Yes.

Mr. Crossfield was concerned? — I believe
he was.

And that was between the period of your
capture and the perk>d of your getting into
-Brest? — ^It was about three days after our
capture.

How did that scheme fail?— By one or two
being disheartened, and the prisoners we took
from other ships being outlandish men, and
not acteeing to it.

Win you swear that Mr. Crossfield was not
one of the foremost in that attempt; was he
not ready to enter sword-inhand into tlie
cabin, to make that rescue?— I was not in
the cabin, and I cannot pretend to say what I
did not see.

Where were you first taken to, when you
went into Brest harbour?— Into the Roads.

Did you go along-side any other English
nliip?— No.

Had you any intercourse with the English
prisoners of other ships at that time ? — Not
until we got on board tne prison-ship.

You were removed from the ship in which
you were taken into a prison-ship ?— We
were.

Did you meet any English prisoners in that
other prison-ship ? — Yes, numbers.

Do you recollect the names of any of them?
— No, not rightly.

Was not Mr. Crossfield carried on board the
prison-ship with you ? — He was.

What was the name of that prison* ship? —
The Elizabeth.

What ship lay along-side the Elizabeth, the
nearest ship? — I cannot rightly say what was
the nearest ship to us.

Do you remember the UAchille ? — ^Yes.

Was not she close to you?— Pretty ncac
hand.

Was not the Normandy close to you ?— She
was pretty near.

I need not ask you whether Mr. Crossfield
speaks French ?— He does.

Did not he serve in common as an inter*
preter between the prisoners that could speak
French, aiul those who could not?— Some-
times he did ; there were several that could
talk French.

Do you know any of the English sailors
that were on board the UAchille or the Nor-
mandy ? — Not the particular ones.

Do you remember any captains ? — Not the
know their names; I should remember them
if I saw their persons.

Do you remember captain Yellowley? —
Not in particular ; there was a captain Yel-
lowley, who was captain of the transport we
came over in; he was not on board the prison-
ship.

Where did you meet him ?— In Landemau
river.

Do you remember Mr. Cleverton? — I do.

Where did vou know him ? — He was taken
by the same ship, two or three days a(\er we
were.

Did he come on board the same prison-
son ship with you? — He did.

Did ne stay on board that prison-ship, the
Elizabeth, during the whole time Mr. Cross-
field and you were cm board her?— He did.

Mr. Crossfield, of course, was acquainted
with him?— For aught I know he was.

You did not mess with Mr. Crossfield, at
this time, did you? — ^I did not.

Do you know whether Mr. Cleverton
messed with him ? — ^I believe he did.

Do you know captain Collins? — ^There was
a captain Collins there.

was he on board the Elizabeth prison-ship?
—I do not know; I remember a person of
that name being there.

You were afterwards removed from the Eli-
zabeth prison-ship to another; what ship
were you removed to?— The ship I went on.
board of was the Peggy.

What ship lay along-side, next the Peggy ?

65]

f^ High Treasoni

A. D. 1795*

[66

—The Active Increase; they were lashed
a]oag-side each other; they lay so close that
I jiUDped from one to the other.

And they were ,both used as prison-ships?
—They were.

Did Mr. Crossfield go on board the Peggy
with you ? — He was on board the Peggy.

Was Mr. Cleverton on board the Peggy?—
He was.

Was captain YeUowley on board the Peggy ?
—I do not know that he was.

Was captain Collins on board the Peggy ? —
I do not remember any such name on ooard
the Peggy.

Do you remembte such a name on board
the Active Increase ?— I do not.

Captain Clarke was on board the Peggy ? —
He was.

NoWy irom the time you were removed
from the Elisabeth prison-ship, in Brest har-
bQur, to the Peggy and Active Increase in
Landemau river^ till you came back to Eng-
land, Croesfield, yourself, Clarke, and Cle-
verton, ware all on board the same ship?—
Not all the time, they were not.

But the greatest part of the time?— I can-
not say how long.

At what time was any one removed? — Mr.
Cleverton was sick, and at the hospital, for
some time.

I believe, when any prisoners appeared to
be sick, (Mr stated themselves to be side, they
were imraediatelv taken from on board the
ptison*ship8 to toe hospital on shore ?«-Yes.

So that if any of the prisoners on board
these ships were taken with an accidental
aackaess, they were removed to the hospital ?
—They were carried to the hospital on shore
trhen th^ were very bad.

Were they not carried on shore when there
was any reason to suspect they had any dis-
ease?—They let them be pretty bad first, and
then they were taken on snore.

After Mr. Cleverton recovered, he came
back to the prison-ship ?--*Yes.

And then he remaii^ on board the Peg^
iaH you all embarked on board the cartel for
Ej^and?— Yes.

vvho eommanded the cartel ?— Captain
GaUoniey, or Yellowley, I do not know whe-
ihet his name is with a Y or a O.

Was ca^tun Collins on board the cartel?—
I cannot tell whether he was or not; there
was a captain Collins, who commanded one
of the transports there.

Long before the return of the cartel, you
knew Siat the person who was called ** The
Doctor,'' was Mr. Crossfield ?-- Yes.

And so did all the ship^s crew ?— I cannot
pretend to say that ; I saw his name wrote,
and I saw him.

I think you said that he continued a pri-
soner under the name of Crossfield till you
came away ?— Till nearly we came away.

Of course he was known as a prisoner by
the name of Crossfield? — ^By the name of
** The Doctor,** in general.

VOL. XXVI.

But any body that chose to be satisfied
about his real name, would know his name
was Crossfield ?— Yes, there was no secret
about it.

You said the captain's private trade and
your private trade consisted of some cotton
stockings ? — Yes.

Did they take up any considerable room in
the sliip ? — I cannot say they did.

They were easily stowed away? — There
were three or four large trunks.

They could have passed perfectly well for
the clothes and wearing apparel of the persons
to whom they belonged ? — 1 do not know for
that, because a person could not wear a con-
siderable number of stockings and all that.

Upon your oath, were not those articleSi
conveyed on board the prison ships, and made
the subject of sale, by the difi'erent persons
who had been taken prisoners ? — ^There was a
trifie which they had, which they broke open.

Inhere was a trifie taken and sold ?— The
ship's crew got them among them.

Was there any quarrelling and any dispute
about them ? — I do not remember any.

Do you remember Mr. Crossfield making
any observation about it ? — I do nol.

Had you never any words with Mr. Cross^
field upon that subject?— I never had any
words with Mr. Crossfield to my knowledge.

You are perfectly sure that there never
were any words between you and Mr. Cross-
field upon tliis subject?— I do not know that
I ever had a word in anger with him.

Did you ever hear him tell the people that
had those stores, that he would inform Xh6
underwriters that they never had been cap*
tured ?— I never did.

Thomas Dennis sworn.— Examined by Mr^

Wood.

Were you chief mate of the Pomona ?—
Yes-
Did you sail in her from Portsmouth?-*
Yes, the latter end of January.

Do you remember the day ? — ^No ; I believe
between the 89th and 31st.

Did the prisoner sail in the ship with you ?
—He did.

In what capacity ?— As surgeon.

What name was he called by ?— I did not
rightly knew his name ; he went always by
the name of ** Doctor."

How soon did you know his name? — Not
till we got into France.

Was the Pomona captured ?— Yes, on the
15th of February, by the La Vengeance, a
corvette.

Where was she carried into ?— Into Brest.

Had you ever seen the prisoner before ha
came on boaotl at Portsmouth ?— Never.

In the course of your voyage, did you ever
hear him say any thing about what would be
done if it was known where he was gone f —
Yes ; the niehtafter we sailed from Falmouth,
he said " if Pitt knew where he was, he would
I send a frigate after himi" moreover " that

67]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial qf Robert Tkotnas. Crot^iM

[68

Pitt would have been shot, only he crossed
some bridse in the room of Westminster-
bridge ;" the bridge I have forgot.

Dkl you ever hear him say anj[ thing about
his majesty? — ^Yes; I heard him say '* his
majesty was to be assassinated at the play-
house with a dart blown through a tube, and
that he knew how the dart was constructed/'

Did he tell you how h was construqted ? —
No, I heard nothing farther about the dart.

Did he say any thing about the form of it P

No, I never heard him mention any thine
about the form; I believe he mentioned
something about '' its being in the shape of
a harpoon ;'' but I cannot tell particulars.

Did vou hear him say any thing more upon
that subject ? — Nothing more about the king.

Did you understand from him what was to
be done with this dart ? — ^No more than he
said '' his majesty was to be assassinated
by it.''

Did he say any thing about the construc-
tion of tlie tube ?— No farther than " that the
dart was to be blown through a tube."

Af^er the capture, did you hear him say
any thine about his beine glad to leave Ene-
land P — When we were nrst taken, Crossfield
took roe by the hand, and said *' he wished
I mieht get a ship safe to England ; he was
elad he was going to France, and was happy
he had got out of England."

On your arrival at Brest, was there any
muster taken ? — ^Yes, the list of prisoners was
made out, and sent on shore.

Did Crossfield sign his name? — ^Yes;
« R. T. Crossfield ;" and he said " he had no
occasion to be ashamed," or '* to be afraid,"
I am not sure which, '' of his name now."

How. Ipng did he go by that name ?— All
the time he was in France.

Did he change it to any other name? —
Yes ; the day the list of prisoners was made
out to be sent to England, he changed his
name to " II. Wilson."

Did you see the list in which the name of
H. Wilson was entered ?— Yes, I over-hauled
it ; it mentioned " his being captiurcd in the
Hope Brig," instead of the Pomona.

By what ship was it mentioned he was cap-
tured .^— By the same ship, the La Vengeance.

Was that in his own hand- writing ? — Yes.

Did you hear the list called over r— I did.

Who called it over ?— The commissary from
Brest.

What name was he called by ?— H. Wilson.

Did he answer to that name f — Yes, and
he walked aft directly.

Were you the person who gave information
to the magistrate of Crossfield ?— No ^ I beard
of it upon the road, as I was commg from
Cornwall to town, at a place called St. Austie,
or at bodmin ; at Bodmin, I believe.

Whom did you inform of this ? — I was sub-'
poenaed before the privy council.

But to whom did you give inielligeuce of
what had passed ?— lo nobody ; I never men*
tioned it before.

You did not go before any magistrate ? —
No ; I never mentioned his name to any body
till I was subpoenaed ; I was going to sea the
next day.

ThmM Dennis cross-examined by Mr.

Gumey,

You sailed from Falmouth on the ISth, and
were taken on the 15th— How many days
were you upon your voyage to Brest, after
you were taken?— I believe we got into Brest,
on the dSnd or 23rd.

Then you were seven or eight days upon
your voyage ? — ^Yes.

Do you recollect any plan being formed in
the course of that voyage, amon^the English
prisoners, to seize the French ship ?— I do.

Were you concerned in that plan ?<— Yes.

Was captain Clarke concerned in it ? — ^Yes.

And Mr. Crossfield .^— -Yes, I believe he in-
tended to be one.

In fact, vou all meant to rise upon the
French, and to seize the ship ? — Yes.

Were you of that party in which Mr. Cross-
field was to be?— The people were to be upoa
deck, and those in the cabm were to seize the
arms in the cabin.

You were put on board the Elizabeth in
Brest harbour ? — ^Yes.

Near which there were the L'Achille and
the Normandy ?— Yes.

The corvette took another vessel after she
had taken you, before she got back to Brest f
—Yes.

What was the name of that other vessel ?
—The Hope brig.

Who was captain of her ? — ^Mr. Faulkner.

Was Mr. Cleverton on board that vessel f —
He was.

Was he put on board the Elisabeth with
you and Mr. Crossfield ? — He was.

How long did he remain on board the Eli-
zabeth ? — As long as we staid.

Were captain Yellowley and captain Collins
on board the Elizabeth ? — ^No.

They were captains of- cartels?— Yes, in
Landemau river.

The Active Increase was close to the Peggy P
—Along- side of her.

Captain Yellowley. and capt^n Collins weie
captams of two cartels near you f — Yes.

You had access to these vessels ?— Some-
times.

Mr. Crossfield, after some time, leA the
Peggy .>— Yes.

On board what ship did he go ? — One of
the ships in which captain Colans, capUirn
Yellowley, or captain Alexander were — I can-
not tell which.

Who was captain of Uie Active Increase ?
— Captain Fearnley : he died.

You were enabled, by the politeness of the
French captain, to save some part of the
private trade of the captain and of yourselves ?
— Yes.

What did that private property consist of?
— Stockings, chiefly.

69]

far High Treoion.

A* D. 1796.

[70

Some walche»?-— The. captain saved some
watches.

And jewelleiy, some trinkets? — ^Yes.

Was this property insured? — I do not
lightly know.

00 not you know that ?-r-I had none of my
own insured.

Do you not know that captain Clarke's was
insured ?-^I have heard it was.

These articles were afterwards the subject
of traffic on board the prison-ship, were they
not?— Yes.

You recollect some observations being made
by Mr. Crossfield, respecting this being a
Aaud upon the underwriters ? — ^Not to my re-
collection.

Tiy and rub up vour recollection a little ? —
It never concerned me.

1 ask you whether Mr. Crossfield did not
not expressly charge you and captain Clarke
with defraudinjg the underwriters, by the sale
of these articles? — ^Never me; he did not
charge me.

Did you never hear him charge captain
Clarke ?— No.

Had you never any words with him upon
the subject ? — No.

That you are sure of? — Yes.

Then if anv body should swear that you
had, they will swear what is untrue ? — ^Yes,
if they swear I had any words with the doc-
tor upon that subject.

Or he any words with you ? — Or he any
words with me.

Was there no quarrel between }^ou and Mr.
Crossfield while on board that ship ? — ^No, I
do not rightlv know; I never exchanged fif\y
words with him to my knowledge, all the
time we were in France.

How many did you exchange with him be-
fore you went to France, fifty more ? — I can-
not say.

Perhaps you were not in habits of great in-
timacy ? — ^My station was on deck ; his station
below.

Did any words pass between you, respect-
ing any nezligence of your's, by which the
ship was taken ? — Never, to my face ; I heard
be bad said so behind my back. I was in-
formed so, I never heard it from himself.

Did you never talk with him upon that sub-
ject ?— No.

You are sure of that?— Yes.
. Are you quite sure that it was not on ac-
count of disputes and quarrels between you, |
Ht. Crossneld and Le Bretton, that Mr.
Crossfield was removed on board another ship ?
—No there was not.

There was no disputes between you, Le
Bretton and Mr. Crossfield ?— No.

That you are quite certain of?— Yes, I am.
. You understood that Mr. Crossfield, behind
your back, bad blamed you for the capture of
the- ship ? — Yes, I heard he had said it was
my fault that the ship was taken, my not
making sul; but he never mentioned that to
■ay face.

Mr. Crossfield I believe lived constantly on
board the Elizabeth with Mr. Oeverton, cap-
tain Clarke, and those persons ? — lie did.

He messed with them ? — At the same table.

Was he in considerable intimacy with any
of them ? — Not remarkably, that I took any
notice of.

However he did daily and hourly associate
with, and mess with them ?— Yes.

You were miserably off in These prison-
ships for want of provisions ? — No, I cannot
say I ever wanted provisions while I was
there.

Had you never any. bad provbion there? —
Yes.

Bad provision and confinement were not
very pleasant to you I suppose ? — No.

Did you ever take any steps whatever for
getting your liberty? — No,

Did you ever state to the French, either
directlv or through the medium of Mf. Cross-
field, that you were an American ? — Yes.

Did you forge a certificate of your being an
American ? — I did not forge any.

I do not mean to use an offensive word : you
did write a certificate purporting that you were
an American ? — I wrote to the consul.

Did the consul give you any a£6urance that
he would endeavour to pass on that Certificate
for you as an American ? — Mr. Crossfield told
us before we got to France, that he would
procure us all our liberty.

Did not he state that he was a naturalized
Hollander f — Yes, he wrote that.

Do not you recollect that he wrote to Ley-
den, to ascertain that he had a diploma from
that university, and therefore was a natura-
lized Hollander ? — I recollect he wrote to some
place, but what place I cannot say.

Was Mr. Crossfield a man of the roost

frave and serious deportment imaginable ? —
To.

I believe he was very much the contrary ?
-—He was a man that drank very much.

I mean was he a man of grave deportment,
or of a good deal of levity ? — ^Very much
levity in talking.

Talking and rattling a good deal ?~Ycs.

You hardly knew sometimes whether he
was in jest or earnest ? — Indeed 1 did not pay
much attention to him.

On that very account ? — No ; from his bad
principle altogether.

Loro Chief Justice Evre, — If the prisoner
had chosen to have staid in France, might he
not have staid there ? — T cannot say.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre.— Did they oblige
the crew to go on board the cartel ships, if
they had expressed any Inclination to stay ?-;-
I never heard any body say they had an incli-
nation to stay.

Mr. James Winter sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Fielding.

You were I believe master of a vessel called
the Susanna ?-i^I was the owner of both ship
and cargo.

71]

36 GEORGE lit.

Trialqf Robert Thomas CrossJUld

[72

' On your passaee from Newfoundland you
were captured?— Yes; by a French frigate
and two sloops of war.

Were you carried into Brest by this French
frigate ?— I was.

lou came from Newfoundland? — ^Yes;
and was bound to Spain or Portugal.

Do you recollect the time when you arrived
at Brest? — I was taken on the 6th of Decem-
ber, and arrived at Brest on the ISth I
think.

What became of you when you^ were car-
ried to Brest? — I was on board a prison ship
some time, and afterwards was removed into
Brest Castle.

During your being at Brest, did you at any
time see Crossfield the prisoner ? — I was car-
ried on the SOth of March up Landernau
river ; there were three English cartels lashed
together, I was put on board one of them.
• Were you on board any ship where you
saw Crossfield? — Crossfield came on board the
ffhip I was in, I think on the Snd or 3rd of
April, it was the beginning of April.

On board what ship dio he come to see
you?— The Revolution Brig, captain Yel-
lowley.

Did any thing pass between you at that
time ? — Captain Yellowlcy introduced him to
me, as Mr. Crossfield ; he said, ^ his name
^▼as not Crossfield, but Tom Paine," and
laughed.

- what did you say to him, upon his saying
that? — ^I said nothm^ to him; afler he had
been at supper he Began to sing some very
bad seditious songs.

Did anv thing afterwards pass relative to his
majesty the king of England ?^Ye8.

What passed on that subject? — ^He said
'^ he shot at his majesty, but ui:duckily missed
him."

Did he say where ?— He said it was " be-
tween the palace and Buckingham-house."
I asked him some time after, wlien he and I
vrere walking the quarter deck, where was
you when you shot at his majesty? he hesi-
tated sometime, and then said, between
Buckingham-house and the Palace.

Did you continue the conversation with
him upon this subject; did you ask him dny
cither question?— No; it was his constant
subject every day after dinner, and afler sup-
per ; I dined and supped with him every day,
sometimes on board one ship, sometimes an-
other, for ^se months togetner.
^ Then, as you had s great m^y opportunl*
ties of hearing this gentleman's declarations,
did you ever hear him say any thing ouHre re-
lative to his majesty ?— Yes.

In the general, in what way did he apeak
of him?

Mr. Adaaij^l hope vour lordship does not
think that any thing wito respect to this man's
conversation, that does not go to the point in
question, is evidence.

• Mr, Fielding, — Does you lordship call upon
ZDC to su3tain the propriety of asking a wit-

ness questions of this nature ? — ^having esta-
blished the ground immediately relative to the
charge, surely I am at liberty now to prove
the deportmeiit of this man^ and what he has
said, with respect to his majesty, at any other
time, subsequent to that substaotive evidence
I have ofilered already.

Mr. Adam, — My learned friend has only as-
serted his right, he has not argued it, and
therefore, it would be idle in me to argue it.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — If it is pressed,
afler the fact is established, I c^not say that
general conversation, importing his sedition
and enmity to the king, is not in corroboration
of the fact before stated; it is to be considered
what effect even this declaration, now proved,
will have ; it is a declaration totally different
from that which is proved by the former wit-
nesses, and has no relation, indeed, to the
particular charges in this indictment.

Mr. Attorney General, — I certainly shall
not pres$ it.

Mr. Fielding. — ^Did he say with what wfca^-
pon he had shot at his majesty ? — No.

Did he givaiany description ?— He said he
had a thing, which I understood him he had
shot at him with, something as large as that
candle-stick, and as long as the candle and
candle-stick together, which was like a pop-
gun, round and hollow, about a foot and a
half long; he said, *'ne intended to put
some poisoned darts in it ; that he had snot
at a cat and killed her ; that the cat expired
in a few minutes afterwards in great agonies ;^
he said, '* it would kill any man at thirty
yards distance, and nobody could perceive
that he had done it f this he repeated fifty
times, while I was in his company.

When you were in company with him, were
there other people in company with him also ?
— ^Yes there were nine or us dined together
every day.

Was this conversation before other people
too ?— Yes.

And not confined to you? — ^No; except at
certain times when he and I have been
walking the quartcr*deck, and we have
talked it ever together; he showed me in what
manner they were made, with his finger in
some wet upon the table ; he stroked with his
finger as if there were hairs m it ; he said
«< tney opened when it strucky and something
flew out and let the poison in."

When the arrow penetrated the poison came
OQt?-^' That as soon as the arrow stnicki the
poison came out of the dart.''

Had you any eonversation about where be
^t the poison?-~He said, ** he prescribed
It;" but! do not know the place where it
was bought : he said, ** he was the very per-
son that ordered it to be made up.'^

What, do you mean the poison?— Yesj
'* the poison to be mixed."

Did he say what sort 6f poison it ^k^?-^
H«i ^d, ^ he got it at a shop."

Did he say for ^hat purpose he had fiot
this poi80Q?<«*To fire at bi8 msyesty. He

731

Jbf High Treasofi.

A. D. 1796.

[74

said, ^ he had fired at his majesty ;" but he
never ^id it was with that that he fired at
hitn ; he said, " he fired at him, but unluckily
ais^ him;'' I heard him say that fifty
times ; that, *' he damned unluckily missed
him;" sometimes he said, ** it was very un-
Incky."

Was this description hkewise given by
him to the people who were present, when
he dined with you, or was in company with
you > — ^There was nobody in the cabin with
me when he made that remark ; the captain
and some of them were gone on board the
French Commodore, and some were on board
the other ships; he and I were sitting at the
table drinUns some grog.

Did you, during thote ^ve months, ask
him any farther explanation of those thines
or not? — ^No, I never did, I was afraid to do
it; I only asked him one question when
we were walking the qiiarterAleck together,
where he was wnen he shot at the kins? he
said, ^ he was between Buckingham-liouse
and St. James's;" after he h£^ hesitated
come time, he said, " I was between Buck-
ingham-house and St. James's Palace.**

i>o yon remember having any conversation
with lum in August? — Yes.

Did he say any thin^ about his wishes,
relative to the people m London, and his
niBJesty?— He said, '< he hoped he should
live to see the day when the streets of Lon-
don should be up to his ancles in the blood
of the king and nis party."

Was this said in the presence of more
persons than yourself? — ^Yes.

Do you recollect the names of any eentle-
men who were present when he made this
declaration? — ^Yes; I recollect one gentle-
man said, God forbid^ matters may be done
more easily.

Who was that?— Captain Yellowley.

Do you recollect any other persons, by
name, that were present ?-- No, none else.

Did he say any thing about the chemist
from whom the poison was purchased? — He
said, ** he went to the chemist's and ordered
how the poison should be made up, and it
was made up; that he made use of some,
and shot at 9 cat, and the cat expired in a
very short time, or in a few minutes after-
wards.**— I believe I made a mistake in sav-
ins it was in Ausust, it was som^ time in July,
I Delieve, that he made use of that expres-
sion about his majesty.

When this conversation had continued
between you of his having shot at his ma-
jesty^ did he say anything of what became
of himself, or what he was oblieed to do ? —
lie said, '' he was obliged to maxe off imme-
diately to Portsmouth, where be went on
board a South-Sea- man, that in two or three
days afterwards they fell in with a French
frigite, and luckily were carried into Brest.''

Did he say any thing about a pursuit being
made alter him by a king^s messenger?— He
said, ** there were two king's messengers

after him — that he was pursued by two'king's
messengers."

When you first knew him at Brest, by
what name did he pass ? — By the name of
Crossfield only. At the time he introduced
himself as Tom Paine, he said he went by
the name of Tom Paine on board some other
ships. — When he was given in to the list to
come home in the cartel, he entered his name
as *• Henry Wilson."

You have said there were several people in
company with you at dift'ercnt times? — Yes.

Endeavour to recollect all the conversation
that passed when he said he wished to sec
the streets of London flowing with blood ?— >
That was his constant conversation all that
night, till Captain Yellowley interrupted him,
and said| God forbid, matters may be done
more easily.

Was there any person else, in your com-
pany with Crossfield, who said any thing
which drew an answer from Crossfieldf ?-*No:
captiun Collins, another time said, he should
be happy if he could have the cutting off of
the king, Pitt, and parliament.

Who said so? — Captain Collins said, he
should be happy to have the cutting off of
the head of both the king, Pitt, and the par-
liament

What did Crossfield say, in answer to that?
— ^He said, ** have patience, have patience, I
hope to have the cutting off some of them
b^-and-by myself.'^ Captain Collins said, he
wished to have the cutting off both king, Pitt,
and parliament's head. Crossfield said,'* have
patience, have patience, I hope to have the
cuttingoff of some of them by-and-by myself.'^

When did you leave Brest P— On the srth
of August.

In what cartel did vou comeP — I came
along with captain Yellowley, in the Revo»
lution.

Do you know how Crossfield came over?-r-
He came in the same ship.

How long was he embarked on board that
ship before you sailed from Brest P — He was
not long on board, I was on board the French
Comm^ore with him ; he and captain Yel-
lowley went on board the French Commo-
dore half an hour or an hour before we sailed;
when Crossfield and Yellowley came out from
the cabin, Crossfield said, ** every thing now
is settled to my own satisfaction :" that was
said upon the gang-way of the French Com-
'modore.

What became of him after this declaration?
—One of the captains, that was in the boat,
held up his hand to stop him from saying any
more.

What captain do you mean P— One of the
masters of the vessel, captain Wyatt, or cap-
tain LambtoD, I cannot say tvhich; he far-
ther said, at other times, toat " the French
had given him great encoUnwement, that they
woum provide for him ;" he said that fifty
times, but lie never explained more than that.

What became of him aflerwardsP— Then

T5]

36 GEORGE lU.

Trial tf Robert Thamat Crottfidd

[76

he went on board the cartel, and we sailed
that verv day.

How long were you upon your passage to
Englandf— Three days.

During your passage, did any thing re-
markable taJce place? — No, not a word, nor
for many days before that, till the time we
ieA the Commodore.

How came it thai nothing passed between
you P — ^He was very close, he did not offer to
mention a word there; he never said a won],
I think, from tlie 18th or 19th of August,
until the very day he left the French Com-
modore; he never said a word, that ever I
beard ; he was always verv close.

When you came to Bngland where did you
land?— At Mevagiss^.

Did you communicate this to any body? —
I imroraiately inquired at a public-house at
that place for a justice of the peace ; the land-
lord told me there was a justice at two or three
miles distant, and he would go with me him-
self.

Did you go to this justice of the peace? —
I went immediately, I was not ashore five
minutes before I went to the justice's; when
we came to his house he was not at home ;
I saw the justice afterwards, and laid an in-
formation against Crossiield.

What was done upon it? — He sranted a
warrant to have him apprehended; when
they came down to apprehend him the next
morning, the vessel was gone over to Fowey,
he was pursued to Fowey, and was appre-
hended.

Mr. Jamii Winter cross-examined by
Mr. Adam.

May I ask you what age you are ? — Fifty-
nine years of age.

You belong to Newfoundland ?— I am re-
sident at that place at present, but I was
born in England, ray family are at New-
foundland, and I carry on my business there.

And you happened to be captured and
taken into Brest as a prisoner.^ — ^Yes.

At what time were you captured ? — On the*
6th of December, 1794.

You were brought on board this prison-
ship after having been some time in Brest
Castle?— Yes; on the 20th of March, I went
on board the English prison ship.

You have mentioned the names of two
persons on board that prison ship, captain
Collitis, and captain Yellowley ?— Yes.
. Can you recollect the names of any of the
persons who used to mess with you at that
time?- -Yes.

Was captain Clarke one? — ^No.

"Which [)rison ship were you on board ? —
The Berwick; captain Alexander, captain
Collins, captain Yellowley, captain Lambton,
William Byron, and Henry Byron, Richard
Taylor, Crossfield, and me.

Where are those gentlemen now? — I do
not know ; captain Yellowley is in London, I
believe.

Where is captain Byron ?— I do not- know.

Where is the other Mr. Byron? — I do not
know.

Did they come over in the cartel with
you ?— Yes, all of them.

You do not know where the^ reside in
England?— No; I believe in Shields, some
of them.

Did any body ever ask you where tl\ey re-
side in England? — ^No.

Have you never mentioned their names
before?— Not to any justice, only to the
gentleman at Mevagissy, I mentioned them
all to him.

When you mentioned all of those persons
to the justice, at Mevagissy, did ^ou state
that they had corae^home with you in the
cartel ship? — Yes.

Did you tell him that they were the per-
sons with whom Crossfield and you had been
in company? — Yes ; I did not mention them
as if they had been of a party.

I do not want you to accuse those gentle^
men, I only want to know whether you told
the justice that all those gentlemen, you
have mentioned, were constantly in your,
and in Crossfield's society, at this time?—
Yes ; all of them excepting captain Alex- ■
ander, and he remained there.

Those Mr. Byrous were very respectable
men, were they not? — They seemed very
well there.

They lived in the mess wHh you ? — Yes.

Perhaps you thought nobody so respectable
as yourielf. These people all came over with
you, and the magistrate in Cornwall, to
whom you discovered this whole business,
knew perfectly well that tliey had all come
with you, and had all been in the society, in
which those thin^ you have mentioned had
passed ? — They did not remain in the vessel
an hour after.

But tliey landed at Fowey? — Yes.

And they were part of the family that dined
with you. every day there ? — ^Yes.

Do you remember captain Clarke? — I re-
member there was such a name, but I was
not acquainted with him.

Did you never go on board the Peggy ? —
No. ^

You say, when you were first mtroduced to
Mr. Crossfield, that he called himself Tom
Paine; had you lived enough with Mr. Cross-
field, at that time, to know bis manner of
life ?— No.

Afterwards you came to know pretty well
how he lived? — ^When he came to sing those
songs I withdrew immediately, and went on
board my own ship.

Were you enough acquainted with him to
know that he accustomed himself to strong
liquors ? — Yes, when he could get it ; but he
could not get it there; he woulddrink it if he
could get it.

How long was it from the time vou first
became acquainted with Mr. Crossfield till you
came away ? — ^About five months,

77]

for HigA Treason.

A. D. 1796.

[78

And he lived inr intimacy with you, and
those other gentlemen, all the time? — Yes;
he dined and supped with those gentlemen
every night, unless they bappenedT to be on
boara the Commodore, or on shore.

Consequently, all those gentlemen lived
with him too, all those five months? — ^Yes.

Therefore, every single thing you know
they must have known, excepting the private
question you asked him where he shot at the
king? — They must have known the main
part; there was nobody in the cabin but me
when he told me about shooting at the cat
with a dart. There was a little of the grog
dropped on the table, he marked with his
finginr, and showed nte in what manner he
made it.

Do you remember any thing about the
stocy of a hare? Perhaps you may think it
odd you should be asked that question. — No.

You do not remember any thing of a story
that used to entertain the company very
much, adwut a hare jumping into yoiir lap?-—
No, only into my arm.

What was tHat story? — I was coming
thrcM^h Uplime to Lime, in my way from
Axminstcr; just as I got to a wall, I stopped
to make water; as I was buttoning up the fall
of my breeches, a hare came tlirough jny
arm ; I catched him by the leg and turned
him round; it was about twelve o'clock at
night; I threw him in over the gate, in among
a parcel of dogs, and he remained there that
night ; and the next day, just as the parson
was going away to church, the hare got out,
and the dogs followed it all through Lime ;
there they catcbed the hare, and it was car-
ried up.

Then you threw the hare over the ^all
among the dogs? — Yes.

How lone did the hare remain among the
dogs ?— Till after dinner.

This was a story that used to amuse the
company very much. ^-— Yes; I have toM it
oftentimes.

What did you take this hare to be ?— I could
find nothing of him till after I was going to
church ;' I was iust got as far as the sna^Ies
when I heard the dogs out in full cry after the
hare.

After she had lodged very comfortably
among them for many hours? — Yes ; after the
hones had been carried out to tlie dogs, which,
I sin>pose, drew the dogs out.

What did vou tell those gentlemen you took
this hare to be ? — To be a hare.

How did you think this extraordinary hare
could live so long among the dogs without
being destroyed ?— If you send to Lime, if any
gentleman disputes my veracity, there they
wilt get a voucner for it.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — ^The gentleman
asks vou what you took the hare ^r ; I sup-
pose he means to ask you whether you took
ner for a witch?

IFi/fie«.— They say the place is troubled ;
now I took it to be an old hare.

Mr. il/iajTi.— Did not you use to tell those
gentlemen, in the course of conversation, that
you took this bare to be a witch, or the devH
in the shape of a hare?

WUness, — No; it was an old hare that had
been hunted many times by the dogs, and
they never could catch him ; if you want a
voucher for it, if yon send to Lime, you may
get vouchers.

Lord Chief Justice JEyre. — Where did yoa
throw this hare into ?

WUness. — Over a place seven feet hieb^
amon<; a kennel of hounds, and it was twelve
o*clock at night.

Mr. Adam, — Were you ever sworn before a
jury before ?— I have been upon a grand jury
twenty- five years.

I ask you, whether you were ever sworn s»
a witness in a court of justice before?— ^-Many
times.

Lord Chief Justice Zyrc— A grand jirry,
where?

Witnest. — In St. John's, Newfoundland.

Mr. Attorney Generai^\o\i raised a corps
of troops in N ewfoundland ? — Yes.

Of how many?— During the American war
I raised fiftv ; and during this war sixty-nine :
I supported fifty men myself during the whole
American war.

Richard Penny sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Abbott.

You were master at arms of his majesty's
ship Active ? — Yes,

You were taken prisoner, and carried into
Brest ? — Yes.

What was the prison-ship you were on
board of there?— The Elizabeth.

Was the prisoner Crossfield on board the
same ship? — I know the prisoner if I see him.

Do you sec any body there whom you re-
member to have seen on board the prison-
ship?— I know the man if he stands up, in a
moment.

Mr. Abbott, — Go down, and walk round
among the people, and look for him. [The
witness pointed out the prisoner.]

Do you remember hearing him shig a song ;
I do not ask what it was? — Yes.

Do you remember having any conversation
with him the next morning, in consequence
of having heard him sing that song? — Yes.

Did you say any thing to him, upon that
occasion, respecting the king of England ? —
The song was, " Damnation to the king." I
asked him what king ? He said, '* the king
of England."

What observation did you make to him
upon that ? — No more.

What farther did he Say relating to the
king of England ? — He mentioned something
in the song about Mr. Pitt.

But what Bid he say next morning farther
concerning the king of England? — I said,
doctor, you never can be a true Englishman,
to sing tliat song ; he said — ** he %vas one of
the ringleaders of the three that attempted to

79]

96 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomas Crosffield

[SO

blow the dart at his ikiaieaty in Covent Gar-
den."— If Mr. Crossfield does not remember
me, I will put on my jacket I wore in the
French prison with him.

Did he express any sorrow at beine a
prisoner in France? — No; he said "Tom
Paine's works were the best works"

Mr. Adam.-^! submit to your lordship,
whether we are to hear every part of this
conversation ?

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — Havine proved
that the prisoner said he was one of trie three
who attempted to blow the dart at the king
in Covent Garden, I take it to be within the
rule the Court has alroidy laid down, when a
fact which does appW to the charge is proved,
that what goes so far to the same subject as
to be corroborative is evidence.

Mr. Adam, — My objection was, tliat the
prisoner said Tom Paine's works were the
best works.

Lord Chief Justice JSyre.— That, standing
alone, would not be any thing, you must hear
the sentence throughout *. but you broke in
just as something was coming that was
material.

Mr. Adam, — ^Then, can Tom Paine*s works
be a subject for tlie considerationof the Jury?

Lorrl Chief Justice Eyre. — Certainly not ;
hut if a man puts two things into one sentence,
you must necessarily hear both, and reject
that which does not apply.

Mr. Abboit. — What more did he say ?— He
said '* Tom Paine's works were the best works
he oould buy ; and that if ever he arrived in
England he would attempt to do the like
agam.''

When you returned to England in the
cartel ship, did the prisoner return with you ?
—He did so.

Did be say any thing to you, on board that
ship, as you returned home ? — Before he came
out of Brest he mustered me on board ; I
was close to the main-mast, on the Elizabeth's
deck ; and before we came in to Mevagissy,
he said to me '* Young man, was not you on
board the Elizabeth r I told him I was ; he
desired " I would take no notice of what was
said on board of the Elizabeth."

How came you to give evidence upon this
occasion ? — For my king and country.

Did yuu give information to any body of
this? — I gave information to a gentleman at
Portsmouth ?

Did you lay any information before any
magistrate ? — I swore it before a magblrate.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — ^How soon afler
you landed did you mention this at Ports-
mouth ? — I mentioned it at Portsmouth to a
gentleman on board of the Royal William;
he persuaded me to go to Mr. Greetham, the
king*s solicitor there : I went as soon as I had
an oppoctunity*

Richard Penny eross-examined by Mr.

Gurney.

When did you first go on board tl>e Eliza-

beth prison-ship ?— On the S9d of December,
1795,

You found Mr. Crossfield on board that
ship ? — I did not.

On board what ship was he ? — ^I understood
he wi^s on board a south-sea-man.

I am asking about the prison-ship — did yoii
find Mr. Crossfield on board the prison-ship ?
—He came on board the Elizabeth.

How soon af\er you were there ? — ^He came
in March.

Then it must have been in December,
1794, not 1795, when you first went on boanl
the Elizabeth ?— Yes.

It was some months afler you were on
board the Ehzabeth before Mr. Crossfield
came there ? — ^Yes.

How long was he on board that ship ?*^
Above a month before he went up to i^a-
dernau.

How many persons were of the captain's
mess on board that ship ?— He messea close
to the wheel.

Who were the persons in his mess ?— One
of the witnesses in tlie court was one that
messed with him.

Point him out^-He is not here.

Do you mean Dennis ? — Yes.

Was captain Clarke one ? — ^I cannot rightly
say.

How many were there of them in the mess?
— Seven

Were you in that mess ? — No. .

You were on board the same ship ? — ^Yes.

Did you talk with Mr. Crossfield ?— No,
only after that song.

Hail you any conversation with him at any
other time ? — No, oinly those words upon the
poop.

Ilad you any conversation with him at any
other tunes ? — ^No, because he went from the
Elizabeth up to Landernau.

You were a month with Mr. Crossfield in
that prison-ship — had you any other converr
sation with him than that which you have
told us? — He declared more to me at that
time.

Imx asking whether he had other conver-
sations with you besides that time? — ^Not
af\er that time.

Richard Penny re-examined by Mr. Ahh(4t.

You say he declared more to you ; what did
he declare more? — When we were coming
home, he begged me not to say any thing
about what hehad said to me ; afler we werf
mustered on board the cartel, I saw Mr.
Crossfield in very close conference with the
French officer abaft the poop, and they shook
hands togetiier ; that was a gentleman that
came from Brest.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre, — Have you any
thing more to say ?

\The aitneu gave no answer,^

Lord Chief Justice Ejfre. — Did you hear my
question ?

rFiVfifw.— Yes, my lord*

81}

Jor High Trmon*

A. D. 1796,

Lol^ Chief Jmtice fyre.— I am waiting for
an answer ; whiU did be say more f — I suppose
jogr lordsbip baa ^t down, that after he luul^
sune a song, wishing damnation to the king,
I ai£ediiim wIm4 king, and he said the king
of England; that he said he was one of the
jiogleaders i>r the three that attempted to
blow the dart at hb rbajesty in Covent Gut-
dw^and that if ever he arrived in England he
mold endeayowr to do the like again ; that
be said Tooi. .Paioe*s works were the .best
iworks be coiiid buy; that he desired me not
|o .take any notii:e of what he said on board
the Elisabeth, that he was one of the three*

Water Colmer swdrn. — Examhicd by Mr.

• Law. ' ' '

You live at FoWcy, I believe ? — Yes.
- Do y<ta reniember, oh the 3lst 6f August
last, being employed to apprehend Cros^field?
-.Yes.

• Who assisted yoU in apprehending him ? —
Mr. Stocker.

Where did you take him P — Onboard the
cartel lying at Fowey,

' Did he answer to tiie natne of Crossfield ?
^He did.

.^ Were you employed in canyihg him to
Bodfloin gaol ?-<^x es:

Do ^teireeollect having any conversation
with him upon the road ? — Yes ; he said '* h^
would give us a guinea to let him gd, and
lake the irons ftom hU hands; that we should
onlv have a few shilliiigs for carrying him t6
Boomin, affd he would ^ve us a gtliuea each
to let him go :" some time aAer that, he of-
fered tts two guineas each ; I asked him what
lie would do with the driver, he told me ■* if I
would let him have one of the pistols ha
•would pop^ at hieo, and soon settle that bust-

Lord Chief Justice £yre.-*'You had jfistols
.with you in the chuse ?'-^Yes.

Mr. Lmo, — ^Itake for granted you did not
do what he desired ; neither take the money
nor lend him the pistols f — No.

Walter Co/mer-H^ross-examined by
Mr. Adam.

What* state was he in. at the time you
look him on board the snip ? — That was in
the morning; it was in the evening when we
were going to Bodmin.

What sort of condition was he in then ? —
Whether he was in liquor or not I won*t say
for that

Now, do not you think he was very much
in liquor ? — He might be ^ little in liquor, but
I do not think he was very much.

' EKki^h Upton BWon>*-£xamined by Mr.

Garrow,

.. Tou..were ithe ivife of apevson of. the name
of Thomas Upton ?— Yes.

Who luis been xx^iiBH eaamination before the
piiry.fxyuiicii?— Yes. .

Where dla you reside at thje time you last
your husl^df^rlo Wappmg.

VOLXXVI,

V ^ [a?

When did you see him last ?<^-On the 99nd
of February.

Tliat, I believe, was on a Monday ? — It
was.

At whajt hour in the morning did he leave
his home ? — Between eight and nine;

Did you. ever see himi afterwards? — No^
never.

Have you since seen any article of wearing
apparel which he wore at the' time he left his
liome ?— No.

Hishat^ or any thmg else?— Yes, I have
seen his hat, the waterman brought it me
the next morning.

What is the name of the person that brought
it ?— Thomas Annia.

He brought a hat which your husband had
worn when he went from home?— Yes.

Hac^ your husband given you any thine
when he went from home the last morning r
•*— He gave me a seal.

Was. thai a seal which .he usttaUy wore ?-•*•
Yes, which he usually sealed his letters with.

Have you never seen him aince ?«-*>! have
not, nor heard of him.

Except by the information of this water*
man;?f-!»Yes

Have you any reason to know or believe
that he is now alive,- or do you believe he is
dead Nrl believe he bdead^I know nothing
tc the contrary.

. Was he a man addicted to drinking or a
sober man ?•— I never saw hitn disgiased in
liquor in my life.

Xord Chief Justice JSyre.-— I do not see the
necessity of this evidence.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— I stated Upton's
giving- information as au accomplice, and I
gave as a reason Mrhv I could not produce him
here, his beinf dead.

Lord Chief Justice £yre.— I should have
taken it upon yoin* assertion, not as a subject
of evid^cc, that you do not call him, because
be is dead. If that were controverted in any
way to raise a question upon it,to be sure you
would be at liberty to prove it

Mr. Ganrow.-— If your loidsbip is satisfied
that tiiis is reasonable evidence of his death,
we do not mean to go into any mofe of it.

Lord Chief Justke Eyre. — Certainly.

Mr. C arrow . — Do you know a person of
the name of Crossfield ? — Yes.

Do you see him. here? — Yes.

Have you seen him, and seen him more
than once at your husband's house ?-— I have.

Have you seen him there before ydur hus-
band was e)(amined by the privy council ?—
Frequently.

Do you know Mr. Palmer, the attorney?—
Yes I tee him there.

Have you seen hhn> at your husband's
house ?— Yes, frequently.

Have you seen him there in company with
the prisoner Crossfield ?•— Yes.

Be so good as look at this piece of wood
[the model for the tube] ; did you ever see

this before ?^I think X have secu them

O — - -

8S]

S6 GBORGB UI.

Trial of Robert

CrosiJleU

I

In the shop in mf husband's house in

Do you know a person of the naxne of Hill ?

Ves.

Do yoii recollect seeing him at your hus-
band's house ?-— I have seen him.
■ Did you see diis brought to your husband's
shop ?— I saw something brought one night
by Mr Hill which appeued to be like thi»—
I believe this to be it

Look at this [a long brass tube] ; did you
ever see this before ?-— I do not recollect ttiat
ever I did^ ...

Cast your ^e upon that papery did you
ev^ see that paper m your husband's posses-
sion ? — I do not recollect to have seen ahy
^ingofdilsldnd;

Xnxabdh IJaton cross- exiuhlned by
Mr. Gumey,

Where did you reside, Mrs. Upton, at
the time you last si^w Mr. Upton ?— In Wap-
ping.

Do ffm reride tiiere nowf— No.

Where do you reside now f — In Gray's-inn-
kne.

Have voo lived there ever since yoto lost
your fausDand ?•«• Yes.

Mr. Aitornm OeneraL — It has been proved
^•l mean &at evidence has been giveh
to prove— that Upton was concerned with th^
pisoner in ordering certain materials for thb
Mstronent; I am now going to prove
Upton's possession of such a thmg, and his
PMsession of the paper which conUtns the
description and draught ^ a bearded dart

George Steeri sworn— Exkmined by
Mr. Wood.

Where do you live ?— In Gatwood's-Build-
ings, HlU-sireet, Finsbiiry-square;

Ave you a member of tlie London Corres-
ponding Society f ^No, nor never was.

Did you ever attend any of their meet-
ings ?— I did once unfortunately attend one
meeting, with two iellow clerks of mine.

When was that f— The latter end of the
year 1794.

In what month ?— I believe it was about
the month of Ahgust» but I am not certain.

Did yop know Mr. Upton P— I knew him
no otherwise than by seeing him Uie night I
attended that meeting ; I never saw him be-
fore nor since.

Did you sit near him?— Yes; and a felbw
clerk of mine sat next to him.
> What sort of a person was he ?— I do not
believe that I should know him otherwise
thAn his beinff lame in one foot

Did you observe anv thins that he had
ai^ith him P-~I observed ne held something in
his hand which I thought from his being lami
iriras a walking-stack.

Did you a& 10 see itf-«*NOf not being A
k member of the society, I had no right to
ask any person in the room any questidli
whatevec

(M

Did any body else ask to iee iif— A /Ul^
clerk of mine asked hiu( what it was, but I
did nothear biro. give ateyanswjsr fbr what
purpose it was intended.

Did he product it r-^He showed ithimii^
his hand*

What was itf— I peiceiv^ l^ the lUhl
that it was brass.

Was it any thing like that'—fthe bids
tube] Yea; I madenoparticuhtf observMo»
of it, but from what I saw, it was in appeir-
ance the same as that; it is, I believe^ th*
same thmg as was produced to ne before thd

Envy council; I made no mkrk ori it, I bo-
eve it to be the Mime from its appearance^

t¥iiiiam Henry Pii«^i^swom-»£xanmicd
by Mr. Wood.

Were you at the meeting of the ,.Cor-
respondipg SocieW, with the last wttnesf
Steers, on the 16tbof September. 179^^-,
Iwas with him but I cannot speak as to the
time.

Do yon. remember bfj^g with \^m f>ne
evening in September 1794 F-t^I remember
bdm there at the time^ which I suppose you

Do you remember being there one evening
whoi Upton was there ?— J do. . ^

Do you remember se^ingany thing jwirtv-
ctilar under Upton's cof t ?— Yes.

What was It?— A tube.

Was it like this j— [the brass tube] som^t
thing resembling this. .. . .

Had yoii any conversation witl) Upton
about it f— -Yes; I asked him what jt w4s. Y
cannot say positively wjiether I spoke to bias
fret or he to me; I think I tsked him firsi
what it was; I saw a bi( of it stkking out
from under his coat; he p^M it farther out
that I could perceive it better ; upon asking
him what it. was, he did not give me t^y an-
iswer, but shook his head in that manner,
[dfscribiog itl ; he did not tell what it wits for.

pid ypu ask him Mrhat it was for ?— I did.

Did be UH you» or refuse to ,tdl you ?--:H«
did not say I won't tell you, but he shook hii
head and niade no answer.

Lord Chief Justice £yr<r.-^Dkl you. take
Any holifce whether it waS h611bw 6r ihot?— I
think it was hbUow.

Lord Chief Justice firr^-^Bad you any 6^-
portunily of seeing tb^ light flirbiigh it K^
No ; but frofh the best of mjr tebotlfttio^ it
was hollow.

Mr. Lav, — Did it appear to you to lie k
"hollow or a solid instrtf roeht ^-^1 db not tKfaik
it ^va^ a s6Hd Ihitrunieiit

Edwird Stocker sworn .^^xamined liy Jtlr.

GisrfM.

I believe in the inbhth 6f August last voi»
wero one of the eonstaUes of oSb bOfouH of
Fowey?— Yes.

Had ybu, to|inher wflh Mi^ CUdiifv <ha
charge of the prisoner CffOisfieldi to tMIIWI
him to BtidnliiiiMi ?-^Y«B.

What is UkO <Stiil<ciftott IM fttet fOlM

.i^ /

»}

i^ High T^wmu

A. p. m^

[as

j^loc4 iiipniiil^Gust^ tothegftoU— AboMt
twely«aiUe9»
You w«^t IQ acbsUe/— -Yes.
Slate wh«l ooowsatioa the prisoner ad-
dremd to you and your fellow constable in
the course or your joufoey f—He offer^ us
two gjuineas.

* 8t^ what he said to vou?--Ue said in the
iim placet ** that it was better we should take
a guinea eachy and lei him n>,^ hesaid^^he
Hn^mao enough for us both;" then he said
^'^ lie would give us two guineas each/' Mr.
Colmer a^eii hib whi|t we should do with
tJie driver; he said, ^ lend me one of your
yistols, ^nd I wilt pop at him, and settle that
matter.'*

Was tbere any conversaUon as to the quar-
ter from whence the money was to come, if
you would accept of |t?— None at all; he,
aaidy ^ he would give us a draft on some per-;
•on ait Jowey ;f' Tasked bim if he knew any
Inlabitanty be said, '< he did not know any in-'
habitant at Fowey : that it was a person at
f owqr, but not an inhabitant.''

Yott conducted him safe to gad?— Yes.

; JEdbsnT St9ck€r eross-examioed by Bfr.

Ganury.

»

At what liiise did you leave ,Fowe^ to go, to
^*^^9odmin ?-— About nine in the evening.
' Bfr. Croesfield I believo was not veiy sober
Mthatfimef — ^I do not knoifr.

An voii aoit^ sure tliat Mr. Crossfidd was
.Mldfecuy sober ?— rl do not know that he was
. }n liquor, he might or might not.

An you not quite sure that he was not so-
iier ?— a am not sure ; I do not think he was
mu^h ia liquor.

Was not his manner of speaking veiy
,^ueer?^do.notknowasforhis manner of
apeaking.

Sdffard Stodcer ro-eiamined by Mr. Oarrom.

You were not acquainted with Mr. Crost-
,fuM beforef-T-No.

. Had he had the means of getting intoii*
cated, as far as vpu know ?-^I do not know
whether he had or not

Did he a|>pear sober enoush to know what
.|ie was talking about? — I bdieve he was not
4ltsgulsed in liquor; I do not know that be was.

Mr..Giirjic|^. — Did. Mr. Crossfield sleep in
the pbst-cbaise ?— He tell iaisleep a(\er we
<iune alNMit half-way.

And sle^ on ajl the rest of the way ? — Yes.

Lord Cmef Justice Evre, — ^At what time of
tday or night was it ?*-We set out at nine in
•the evenmg from Fowey.

Mr. Harvey WaHkUtte Mortimer sworn^ — Ex-
amined by Mr. Garraw,

You are a gun-emith, residing in FleeU
•atreet ? — ^Yes

For how many yean have you been en-
^agnd in that business ?— Thirty years ; thirty
;mfi a half I believe.

.Yott have been used-kiot only to the oott-

siruction of common fire arms, hut lo the coq-
Mniction of the air gun ?— :Yes.

Are air guns sometimes constructed in the
form of a walking stick ?— Yes,

Is it one of its properties to discbarip and
accomplish its object of destruction without
explosion?— Not entirely without explosion;
if It is discharged where the ur passes Itfiskly
by, you cannot hear it yourself; but if it is in
a confined room, where the external air does
not pass free^' by, it makes a noise like that
[dappine his bands together.]

It would make less noise in the explosion I
conduce in a laige theatre than in a small
room ?-^Certainly.

It Is another property of an air gun, to have
less recoil than the explosMMi 1^ gunpowder?
— ^It has so little recou, that if you were to
hold it against your mce with a glass upon
vour eye, you would not percdve it injurs
the glass.

You m^ht rest it upon jrour dieek bone ?
—Upon your naked eye.

So as to take a most accurate dm?— «Ihave
shot with it so as to hit a naU twice out of
thrice upon the head, and drive it through a
board ; 1 have used it when a gentleman has
desired to hold a smdl thing between his
finger and thumb while I have shot at it

Perhaps it is not necessary to go too mi-
nutely into these discussions, unless it is
thought necessary on the other dde : -do you
apprenend that the tube of an dr gun may be
so constructed as to discharge an arrow, in-
stead of the ordinary discha^ of a bullet l—i
I am sure it may. •

Cast your eye upon this paper, and tell me
whether you think an arrow constructed ac-
tordins to thatdravrlng migh| be discharged,
and whether it would not be a dangerous in-
strument to be discharged by the enlodon ct
an air gun?— Here is a drawing or two ur*
rows, one of which b t>ar()ed| jsaoCher tbst is
not barbed.

Supposing the barbed airow so constractedg
astbatthe Darbedpartsofitmifnt be made
to collapse, ana so to enter in tnat state tha
oppcming body; and suppostng something
consisting of two baibs in the snaps of an ur^.
row, to be put in a collapsed state into an aur
gun and protruded by the force of the dc,.
could it be forced outjn its collapsed state ? —
It might ; but as soon as it was out it would-
regain its native position.

you see no dilEculty in putting a barbed
instrument into an dr gun to be exploded ?—
It depends upon the strength of the springs
of the barb, if the springs are weak it mi^
be done— but those springs could not act with-
out a joint in the part near the end of the
place where this baih is^ they must act upon
a joint.

We suppose it has every thing necessary
to constitute a complete ihstrument^—H
would undoubtedly expand agdn when it
came out into the air.
' . tla«^ you asgr doubt that aainstrumsnt so

87]

86 GEORGE m.

Trial tfRoUri Thmai Crossfield

[88

constxiicinl, projected by the force of tlie air
gun, yirould occasion death ?-— I should have
no doubt; I think it w.otild be a dreadful in-
strunient, if it was proiccted from an air gun.
Lord Chief Justice Kyre. — Can yoti give us
any information concerning thiese two parti-
cular pieces of wood, that are supposed to be
models of something? — ^This might be made
for such an instrument as this ; it might be
made into a tube for a condenser, supposing
this part to be left for the bore, to make a tube
inside; I should th^nk it too large; I should
pot think it well contrived;

Mr, Offrrow.— Your knowledge of the sci-
ence would induce you to miuce the bore
smaller than that proposes it to be ? — ¥es. .
Lord Chief Justice Evre.-^Js there any ap-
pearance of .a bore in that modeH^-The two
ends describe the bore.

Mr. Gtfrrow.— And the larger part the e»-
.temal space? — It appears so. '

Supposing I had wanted a cylinder of the
external. dimensions of the largest of these
pieces of wood, and a bore of tire size of the
other ; would not that drawing have enabled
you to make it of the required thickness ?^— I
'should have some idea of it from this, but I
should have asked a question or two as weU
as seeine this; this could never have befen de-
signed ^r the internal part of an air-gun, '
iTormed into a walking stick; if this was de- {
signed fbra piston to condense the ^ir, it must
have been unconnected witb the gun, and
only have screwed on to it for the purpose of
condensing it ; I should have made my air
cane or air gun, if I had made it, with the
piston entirely in the hand,- that nobody
should have seen it ; this, if it was made,
must have been made to have been put on
pccasion^y, not to have been in the hand.

Supposing such a piston to be applied to a
brass tube, would it not become an instru-
ment of death wiUi such a barbed arrow as we
l^ave talked about?— This wood might be a
model for making a piston to contain air
.enough in a brass tube to have expelled three
or four times wi^out re-charging such an
instrument of death: I could have made one
irom that model, if i had been informed they
wanted it made in that wav, I could have so
done it ; but this is not well done.

Look at this paper, does that top appear to
be a description t>f such a wooden mstrnmefit
as this, thoueh not a very accurate one ? —
Certainly, it does something like that; but it
is evident that the person who drew this was
not a master of drawing.

Lord Chief Justice JE^r/. — Does it describe
sufficiently these two pieces ?— 'I have seen
but one.

Mr. Garrom, — Look at the other part, arid
see whether that drawing describes this ? — I
think I should not have an idea of this form
from this, it is drawn so very badly.

I/)oking at the two together do thev appearj
though badly described, 'to have socn a cor-
respondence that one may be 'made from the

oth^r, with-some verbal assistance (tywaybf
directions ?— With verbal assistance it might,
but I do not think it could h^ made without ;
I cstonot say that there is any thing in it that
is sufficiently like it for me to suppose it wks
iiiade from this drawing, unless the Person
had spme verbal directions besides ; tne t6p
part is well enough described, the piston. .

I -observe the drawing; you have in your
hand has got additions to it; there arc rather
round parts* which it is necessary to be is)afle
acquainted with the drawirtg to describe*; but
looking at thiiit drawing;, do you_ take that \o
• be' a drawing of the tniri^ that you hold in
your right hand? [the modeKJ — If I bad seen
them together upon a table, I should not have
&up(>dsed th'at this had'beeh a drawing of this ;
and it could not have beeii a drawing of it
without verbal explanations.

Lord Chief Justice JEJ;yr«.-—Thc question Is
whether with verbal directioriisi the two pieces
of wood you have in your hand might, have
been formed from the hint riven f^om that
drawing ?—rVery indifferent drawings wTlL do
with verbal directions. '
' Lord phief Justice £yi:e.--Poj;ou suppc^c
that with verbal directions these two pieces of
wood might have been fprmed from, the hint
givdn l)y that drawing? — I have np dbu})t
of it.

Mr>. Harvey Walklate Mortimer cros»«a«*
.mined by Mr..iliam.t ,

If this brass tube had been ptit into yoftr
hands without anv thing being said about it,
shonld you have known for what use it w^
made ?-^It is impossible that I Should hiVe
known what it was for, without any thiiig
beihg said about it. ' '

^ You have said you do not make mir guns in
this form ? — ^We make them in a snugger znd
qeaterform.

Are you in the common practice of making
air guns^ — Yes. -

. And you make them like a common walk-
ing stick >!— Yes ; sometimes 1 make them in
tn^ shape of a common gun, sometimes iti
thf: shape of a pistol ; IhaVe pistols now iu
the shop.

Do not you make them in the form of a
walking stick ?— Yes. • *

And then you make them portable ? — Yes.

Have not you made them frequently in that
forxxi fpr sale ?— Yes ; I sold one wnich his
majesty sent as a present to the dey of Al-
giers, a little while ago.
' So that the pist6n for the condensed air
should lie within the cane ?-^Yes; I caki
make them either within it or without it; I
have made many guns with the piston wiihin^
and others without it.

You ^id that a barbed arrow might be put
into a gim ; but would not the consequence
of firir^it o it of the giln be,' that the moment
the rMistani c of the sides of the cyKruier of
the gun are withdrawn bytbd arr6w getting
te^iAikita Ihjeopeii airitiMac4dopen?-^I' ha'e

m

Jbr ti^h Treason.

wme doubt about that ;' a * barbed arrow may
be pift into a gun with a great deal of ease,
but the end before you get to the point muet
be solid; at the end of that barb there are
twojoiDtSy each of which will bead, but being
bent only a Itttk it wilt open ; it will keep
closed as it flies till it strikesabody, and when
it enters the body, it will immediately open at
the two parts' where there are the joints, and
it will let out whatever is in it ; but in passing
thfough the ur, be it ever so far, it is not in
the lei^t injured, and if it were ever so full it
could not be discharged of its internal matter
till it struck the body ; now that arrow could be
easily made, and if the bottom part were made
hollow you might put a little condensed- air,
«o that whenever it strikes against any body
it should force out what was in it, by the
pressure of the air which was behind it ; if it
was so ttiade it must be feathered, as that
appears to be upon the drawing, but it must be
fathered more than that, so as to press equally
totally rbimd the cylinder, and the pressure
of the whole forca of the air would be entirely
uponr it; I could with a tube which I take
in my hand blow without any condensed air
whatever,* I could with my mouth blow an
arrow of Uiat sort, if within^tz or eight yaids,
with sufficient force to do a mortal injury to
any man living: my ihen are frequently trying
little experiments*

LoTd Chief Justice Eyre^Be content just
to answer the niiestions ; what is- the precise
question you asked him?

Mr. Adam. — ^lle has answered to all that I
wish to ask hiiti; the object of my question
was merely to knbw whether the ftirrow col-r
lapsed immediately as it comes out of the bar-
rel, he says il does not.

Mr. Ga^rbw.— Did you ever sell any of
these walking sticks ?— I dkl formerly to any
that wouki purchase them ; I have not fbr
aome years, T thought them dangenxis.

Lord Chief Justice £^e, — ^Looking at these
two pieces of wood and at this' paper, can -you
from their construction be able to inform the
jury for what use ^ese two pieces of. woort
were intended ?-^I verily believe for the pur-
pose of an air giin. >

Lord Chief Justice JS;yre."-That is what
you believe ? — i do verily believe so; the use
ci tliem I cannot tell.

Lord Chief Justice £yre.— An air*gun will,
I suppose, carry an arrow, or shot, or a ball ?-^
I can shoot a ball at Mxiy yards very strong. .

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — But your- judg-
ment is, that these two pieces of wood appear
to be the models of that which is -to make
part of an air-gun? — Taking the tube and the
models together, I am satisfied they were for.
anair-Kun. .

Lora Chief Justice J^fre. — ^What tube do
you mean ?«->This long brass tube.

Lord Chief Justice £yre.^-Suppo9ing the
long brass tube was entirely out of the case,
what do yo^ s^y then ?*-It would be satislac-
|ory to me that there was something •f that

A. D. i19& ' [90

kind intended to be made, but not so satisfa^-
, tory as with the tube ; it is an additioaal evi«
^ dence iia my mind. «

Roifert W(wdf esq. sworn. Examined by Mr.
Mioriuy General.

, .You are a barrister at law, I believe ^— Tei.

I have occasion to ask you about Mr. Up-
ton,' df Bell-yard ; it will not be proper to state
any conversation, I will only ask you as to a
fact.— ^Do you remember seeing Upton in Au-
gust or September, 1794? — It was the l9th
of September, 1794.

Have you seen these two papers before ?—l
am clear as to this paper with the drawing of
the barbed arrow ; I saw th» in the posses-
sion of Upton, on the 12th of Septembef,
1794. 1 am not quite so clear as to the
other. * •

It was at Upton's house, I bcKcve?— |i
was:

Did you happen to see thit^ in Upton's pos-
session?— I' saw thtte models, but not the
tube, ' • »

Bjoberi Ward^ esq. cross-examined by Mr*

Gumey,

. At what time did you communicate this
fact to auy of his majesty's ministers? — I
think it was on the Friday when I saw this in
the possession of Upton, and I think qn the
Satvirday I waited on Mr. P^tt, but I did not
see Mr. Pitt till theWednesdav followit|g.

Mr. Attorney General. — Did you communi-
cate it to any magistrate? — ^No ; I did not see
any bodv upon the subject, till I saw Mr. Pitt.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL — Vte have closed the
case for the prosecution. - - -*'

'Mr. Adam. — I beg to ask a question or two
of Mr. Palmer.

Mr. Peregrine Palmer called agiun« Examined

hy Jfir. Adam.

Do you know any thing of Mr. Crossfieldfs
pecuniary circumstances ? — Yes^ I do. * *

In what chcunisiances was he at the time
he lef^ London ?-— Hi» whole property was ai-'
signed over for thl*. benciit of his creditors.' "

Was he- in debt do you know? — ^Yes, he
was. • '

Mr. Adam, — I think it right to inform yatUr
lordship, that I am afraid it is absolutely ioi-
posstble for mo to bring the case I have to by
nefore the Court, within- such a contpassr asllo

§ive me the least hope of produciug the evi-
ence in favour of the prisoner^ while the
jury are able to give-that attention to it which
it is of importance to liim th^y should give ;
but I am ready to do exactiywhat your lerd-
ship pleases.

Lord. Chief Justice Eyre, — I am afraid we
shall be under the necessity of going oil if
there will be ah^ prospect of &iBh]ii|g td-
morrow. There is, I believe, n6 -provisbti
made for the jury.
Mr. il(p(am,— The same'thing- happened ^

913

S6 GEORGE III.

Trial, qfiSM^ri Thunm Croa^d

cw

the trial of Mr. Stone,* and the Gciirtii4-
ioiirned. _

LcMtl Chief Justice Eyn.S% fvas cofh
cerns the capacity I should have to do the
country and the prisoner justice. I should be
i;la4 of the acoonimodadon or an adjourn*
ipMt.-

Mr.G^rtu|y — The jury jprcrc accommodat-
. edVith beds at the Jjondon Coffee-house^ on
(he I|ite triab.

Ht, ilitoaw— I do not speak with a view to
uiy personal iiccommodation to myself; but
because I am aware that the case which I
.fliava to lay before the Court, must necessarily
lake up ^ mqch timet as will make it almost
impossiUefor human strength to go through
U wi^ut an a^jaurrunent.

liord Chief Justice £yre.— I should be

•orry, if by forcing you on^ we should put you

,iinder any incapacity to do yonr du^. . I find

the sheriffs have provided lodgings for tl^e

jMiy- What, do tlie jury say about it ?

Several of the jury said, they felt themselves
■o much fatigued that they were persuaded
they should not be able to give proper atten-
tkm to the case of the pnsoner unless the
Court adjourned till the morning.

[It being now past eleven o'clock at night,
fourofikers were sworn in the usual form
to attend the jury, who slept at the Lon-
don CoSee-huuse; and tne Court ad*
joumed to the next morning eight
o'clock.] I

Th9tr9^, May ISIA 1796.

The Court having been opeped, Robert Tho*
mas Cross&id was set io the bar.

DarsvcB.

Mr.ildtfsit^-GentlemenoftheJury; Wei
are now come- to the stage of this cause,^

.1IFl«rii<I'(UA to address you on. the pact o£ the
prisoner. I cannot but congratulate yim and
SDjmelfithat the measure of^adjoMrnoieot from

. ||ie opolusiun and beat of the court last night,
to the quietness and composui^. of this nM>ni-
Ids has taken pbce. I am sure, gentleipen, it
b for the benefit of ua all, that we come here'
srith fresh recollections, with minds unim-
paired by a loittand a fatiguing attendance,
laorder.to.dischaiiee this meet important, this

^oiost weighty, and to .me this mot t a^fiil
daty.

Gentlemen, I may say, and I can say it with
tiMth and sincerity, never brfore tiood I in
ntek a praence. It has never hapMied ^
sas in thecourseiofmy profe^uonu life, to

. * See Vol. 95, p. It05, and noTe.

^ The very learned nerson who d^vered
tibia speech has obligingw fur^i^ed . me with
^« correct rqK)rt of it, which. is here substi-
tuted for the inaccurate aceaunt given injtbe
,9C^giLi)alpaAtc(ltriaL

leadin .conduQtiog the defence of a .prisoner
upon trial for his life. Nor has it erer hap*
pened.to me to be charnd with the life of a
priioner tried for Ihe f^m^ for which the pri-
soner at the bar now standa indic^d. Geo-
tlemen.wheii I inentMn this orcuinetanee, I
canaasjure you, and I can a9sure Ihe learned
and.ipoat respectable judges iRho preside op
xhis ocqufion, that I nme this dedai(atiop, not
with a view of consuming your time, \ty any
vain or .particular apf4icaUon to inyself; I fio
it, because J think nppn this oocasios, it will
ang»s{t that, which, if it weite neceasaty lo
inculcate^ I am sure % hate .mush need etf",
nitmely, that the leaxnedper^ons whopieside
here, will consider thesiselves as counsel for
the prisoner. I Imowitb^their dispesltioii,
I know it is the constantand genaial tenor of
their practice ; and I am sore tbatl stand in
need,.and my client, trusting his cause in my
handa» stands in need of that aid.

As to you gentlemen of the juiy, I confide
.in your haying.come here with a delermiott*
tion to Qoniider this Gaseimpartialty,.patieptlj,
and with that fMntegrity which is your tnie
portion and proper y trtue."

Before I picoceed Io state my observatkMM
ifppn the nature of . the case, (V upon ,tbe e?i-
dence as it has been laid before von, I will
take, the liberty of shortly pn^ntme to ;rou
what I consider the ^juestion.now |o be tned.

Oentiemen,:thfrpriioner at the bar is in*
dieted for high treason, and. the natiire of the
treason for which he is indicted is the oom->
.passing and hnagining the death of the Icing.
By the.law of. the land, as it was stated to you
by.Mr. AttomeyrGeneral, the will or inteatioa
tp Jullthe king goes for the fact. That is .lo
say, the intention of ; killing the king b aa
. ^lach. a crime as if the fact were acioal^ cooa*
^tted. And I agfee perfectly with my leara*
,ed :fibnd,.tb«t it b imposrible ^a conceive m
wiser eoaetment Nay, I enbige upon bb
statement; for; if th^t. institution b wise for
the purppees.of monargbiail government m

Stnesal^it b parUcObrly.wise as applied Io
e flovemfAent.of.thi* cpiintiy. In th[a
mbedpionars>y».whe^tlie.itttiiieoCour g».
vernment ^ves a free scope^to ayariet]^ of po*
litkal opinions and mcnes of thinlmg; it
becoxneaniiiffe particularly. necedarjr to pro-
tect the person who unit^. and fortifies, aal
binds together the geneial ^ratem and.Mnie
ofeur.cpnstitulion. At.the.sametinia, how-
ever, that the leostaUire has been eauUoua,
and has particiiurly interfered to guard.the
sacred life, on which I assert (with the sanee
epeigy aaMr. Attomey-General)the safety of
the state so much, ao eminently depends : ft
has been most aiixious to. fence, and guand-uia
critical situation of the prisoner; to. take care
thathe shall have a, fkir trial; lind themfore^
among other, things^ to lay down certain mbs
for the manner of assembling you in the
place where ytni are now seated, andto regu-
late the principles which are to* «Ma mx m
I cQQsikteruig the evidence* Ibua widk tb^kas'

fl

I
I

i

f

II

II
I

i

I
t
I
I
I

93r]

for tii^h TrioMM.

A. D. n96*

|M

And oolistitiAbtt ^sely protect the crown I p^ntlemen^theactof ^Ittmentnjrs (lor

agsinst , sudden, attacks; tlie same law and
coostitutioa anxiously erect safeguards kit the
subfBct ftom illegal convictions.

Gentlemeiiy one of the safeguards of the
ftibfect is^ that there shall be stated upon the
face of the indictment, those ooert acU or
9pen. dnd$^ which are supposed to have the
tendency lo accomplish the end in question.
So upon the present occasion you hdve had it
stated to you (and I will therefore only recite
it shortly lo you) that this indictment does
setfortlk such overt aeiti. that it ttates^in the
first plaee^a tonspitecy between the pristuner
add three other persons who are likewise
iodkled bot who oo not yet stand upon their
tria], and persons to the jurors unknown, to
preoaie a eertain instrument, to ba loaded
wita a certain arro^ to be sent forth from
thence; for the (Purpose of taking away thk
liie of the king. It likewise states the same
overt act, but without l&yihs it to be done in
conspiracy with others, ft likewise states
overt acts of consultation^ where they con>
auHed and eonferved together^ for the purpose
of taking kway the life of the king. These
are^ gener^ly speakings the nature of th^
overt acts set forth in the indktmeat

You. will observe throughout, j^entlenden,
that thereaie two distinct propoeitionain thife
case. One. proposition is, that ^here wks an
fnstffUOMnt prepared or ordered to be prepared*
anbttier is; tne mtent or the purpose to which
that inslrumeDt was- meant to be applied.
Tbe^ are iri their nature distinct prdpostnons t
they are distinct propositions on the face of
the indictment; and tbejr aredistinttpro|kisi-
tions in the proofs as I shall . have occasion
afterwards to show ^ou when I come to speak
tb the evidence.

You have heard upon this occasion that
there have been various rules laid dbwn hf
lawyers, relative to the tnnnner in which evi-
dence in a question of this nature is to be
considered by a jury; but that there is no very
difficult qilesUon of law upon the ndes of
evideitee in this tase^ so UMt| I shall have the
happiness, I thst, df making mysfclf distinctly
understood bv vou.

My learned triend the attorney generid de-
rives hi^ doctrines of thekw of England; with
rcapect to tre^n; from an authority to whont

he paid the bighcAt tribute of appladse. To ., . ^ ~^

that kutbority no tribute of appttuse is too is nbw, by common consent (and it will be so

gMau.-— I allode.to Mr. 'Jnitice foster, whole
name^ be truly ssid,-wcinld live as long as the
«3onsbtutibn of England endured; I shaU
have occasion, ib the aeqoel of wbbt 1 shkll bt
noder th4 necessity 6f addreksibg to you; to
have moch i%coarw to the doctrihes and to
the learning of that.emhientpenDQ; butnow^
in thustase of my address to ydb^Icatt your
attention fiack tb B^move early peridd of cng-
iish hiscorjr and bw^ that i mby attov^ these
doetrnkel to have oontlnoedtroiti Imeitly pe-
riod, ftfidndhfig ttik time.iMxQ Mr. ioiliee
FMter ihote, evca uaio this diy.

this is an indictment upon the statute of ^th.
Edward Srd) << When a man doth compaaa
or im^ne the death of our lord the lunft
and thmof be praviibly attainted of open deed^
by the people of his condition, he shall be ad-,
judged guilty of treason." Thb is^ shortly,-
the part of the statute which rekOes to tbci
crime in question, which 1 state to you sepaio
rately from the other treasons entfctea by thai
statute, iif order that you may precisely and
clearly understand, that the only question
for you to try upon the evidence is, .whether
the person itt the bar did compass 4nd imag^n*
the death of the king; and. wheth^ be «* bo
thereofj>roM%attainted of open deed." Now|
gentlemen, Uie word ^rooMy baa been upon
^ occasions, a word much relied and com^
mented upon in the oonstrttction of Una act
of parliament! the meaning of that word haa
received a most solemn, t moat delib>niK
and a most enlightened consideralioa ftoea %
person greatly ominedt in the kw of thii
country^ from my lord chief jtistice Coke^ who^
in bis commentaiy upon this statatei M^a-^
*^ By protMyi is meant that it is upoin dweet
and tnanifest proof, not upon conjecture, or
presumptions* or inferenc^* or strains of wit|
but upon gctod and sufficient proof s and heUeia
^he adverb fnvoably hath a greitt force, and
signifieth a direct plain proof, which word tho
pu:liament dki use, for that the offence #aa
so heinous, and so heavily ana severe^ :p»^
nisbed as none other the like; and^ therefore!
the offender must provahfy be aUainled^
which words are as forcible as tunm man^ttt
qnd direct prwfi note, the word. is ni»t pr^m
Itahhf^ for then ooinmon argument would do,
but the word is pravabfyi be attainted."
. . Such is theconstructiOd, such is th^ opinion
given ,by sir Edward Coke, considenng this,
statute deliberately in his closet-*a . ptnaon*
deeply acquainted With the principles of the
law of En&laad.-^You seaihat hs malBca •
great.deal To depend upon the Word praoakiy :
that he distinguishes most materially between
the word pr&vabfyy and tlie word pro6aM^;
and he says, that on account of the seventf?
of the punishment, and for the protectioA of
the prisoner, the. legislature ro^ant that ho
must be attainted praoabfy that is^ by iiNtoii-
ffU and direei pnxf.

The commentary of this profound latry^

stated to .yoo fruiti the. Court) allowed lo bo
the undoubted law of Englaod-^to be. inoor*
porated as completely .into Uite con&titdtiett
and the law of the coohtiry as any other maaiai^
prindple^ or dedkration of the conmoii lailT'
friiatsocven — Gentlemen^, .tins, which. .wia>
Ijud down by milord chief justice Coke in hit
eloiwWthia which has beeareoo^'iaBdJtt tfaw
tew of theconnts^this which is litiiibirte^
rcUed u|^ by jodgjeb. and ,by. jtnes, iA
kU ^iMilmia Of twaieri, mb the sound mb
of constniction and

into effiKt, ^aii italkdUl ihiwctld upeOi by

49J

36 GEQROE III.

Trial ofBaberf Thmat CrossfieU

[90

AMiber > mal lumtnaiy • vf fh^ taw, in - a
nemackaMo prosecution 'in the reign of
James 1st— not indeed a prosecution for trea*
89n, but a prosecution in which sir Francis
Bacon (to wliom I allude) brings the doctrine
home directly to the question of treason; so
thsttbe same principle which was laid down
by my lord Coke privately in bis institute,
waa adopted and acted uoon in public coorl-
by my lord Bacon when ne was atUnmey-ge-
aeral, at a time when he was addressing a
jury impanelledy as you are now, to try a
prisoner indicted b^ the crown.

• My lord Bacon^ in the trial of lord Somer-
set,* says, ^ The king hath given us in com-
■land that we sboula not expatiate or make
invectives, but materially pursue the evidence,
as it conduceth to the point in question ;
a matter that, though we arc glad of so
good' a warrant, yet we should have done
onrseKes} for far be it firom us, bjf amy strains
<jf^mU^ cr art, lo seek to play prizes, or to
blafon our names in blooo, or to carry the
day otherwise than upon sure grounds. We
thall cany the lanthom of justice (which is
theevidence) before your eyes upright/' .^I
will speak somewhat of the greatness of the
ofeioe, not to weigh the prisoner down, but
to show that a great offence 'needeth a good
proof, for the o&noe, next unto* high treason,
IS the greatest.''

• In that case, my lord Bacon was speaking
en* the trial of a person for murder, but you
see he brines the whole doctrine home to the
question of- treason* He observes, that the
king bad given it in command not to expatiate
or make mvectives; the rules of. modem
times, and the practice of the constitution
now admit of no such allusions^ I am suie,
however, if th^ had been permitted, the mo-
aaveh under whose, government we live, who
considers his own life as sacred only for the
benefit of his people, would have given such
a command, if according to the usage of these
tiroes^ it bad been regukr so to oo. I am
sore, at the same time, that I do no more
than justice to my learned friend when I say
thatsuch a command to him would have been
iinnecessary, for throughout all the opportu-
nities that I have had of seeing bis practice,
in the eminent* and difficult situation in which
he stands, he has followed forth and copied
the doctrine faiid down by my lord Bacon.

• .Gentlemen, my lord Bacon brinss his doc-
. trine iiome to treason ; he lays it down in a
ease of murder, but he 'Says expressly that
murder is tb& highest, orime except treason;,
be may therefore be said to brine.the doctrine
of jny lofd Coke, with renrd to me word proih
mbfyy home to.tbe.'particijJar point of treason;
lor he lays it dowft.as doctrine, ihat in a ques*
lion where there is a prisoner «t the bar trred
fbr;fais life, ^whether it be treason or whether
ilbemurder, theavideiiee is not only''* to-be
earned upright bat^he^ises the vwy^ wordsof

Slll^i <■ t/ , -■■ I i**. . ' ■III

T

* JfU^ Volt S^ p. 9Z0.

my lord Coke, and says, that ti is not meant
by him to '* use strains of wit, or arts,-or to seek
to play prizes^"

This gentlemen is the doctrine upon which
this case must be determined; it is the rule by
which this evidence must be judged, and 1
earnestly request of you to treasure it In your
minds, for tne purpose of applying it in the
sequel of this case, when I shall have the ho*
nour of observing upon the evidence particu-
larly to you ; in Uie mean time, permit me to
lay before you what the nature of this accusa>»
tion is, tracing it from its Source.

My learned friend tli^ attomQr«^neral
has brouffht into your notice a, person ^f the
name of Upton, whom be has not been able
to bring here to day as a witness^ The in-
dictment itself indeed brings .IXption to your
notice-; and you have heard froip tlie very
best of all authority (namely, . from the au-
thority of Mr. Attorney-General) that if Upton
had been examined here, he would have ap-
pwed* to have been a persmi concerned in
this crime, and discovering it to the govenw
mentof the country. Soeh is the situation
in which this person is represented to stand.
I shall have occasion in the sequel to express
my deep regret that that person has not neen
to be found and examined : In this part of
the cause I present him to your notice merely
for the purpose of calline your attention to
the nature of the probabilities on which this
case is founded ; and I think I shall be able
to demonstrate to you, on the one hand, that
the probabilities are all against the existence
of such a conspiracy as is here, stated, and
that, on the other hand, there is no proof,
pravabUf gioen, sufficient to establish a con-
trary conclusion;, nor indeed any proof suffi-
cient to satisfy your minds in a case of bloody-
in a crime such as this indictment sets forth,
that there is a ground or foundation upoiY
which to rest a verdict of guilty; but that it
will be your duty to send the prisoner forth
amon^ bis fellow subjects, to pass the rest of
bis life, I trust, in a conduct which will make
it perfectly impossible even to impute to him
any thing like that with which he now stands
charged.

But I must call ^our attention, upon this
occasion, to the particular character ot Upton^
founded on what has alreadj| been proved
in part by the cross-examination of the wit-
nesses for the prosecution, and which I will
afterwards enforce hj farther proof, direct and
manifest, coming home, to the veiy point,
and to the very issue in question. I shall be
enabled to lay before you evidence of the ani-
mosity and hatred which exbted between
Upton and the persons with whom he is sup-
posed to have eonspired, of whose actions,
according to tlie case made bv the crown, he
was first the accomplice, and afterwards the
spy. I shall be able to prove, that Upton
was in a state of disagreement and hostile
contest with Smith, one of those indtotfed for
this treasonail^ conspimcy; of idoknt

9T1

^as^Treatn.

A. O. 1796.

(.98

ference with Higgins^ soother of thev ; and at
eamity with Le Maitre, the third; that
there was Dot any intimacy or confidence be-
tween him and the prisoner at the bar ; for
you will recollect that you have' it proved by
tticontestible testimony, by the evidence
of Palmer, that the prisoner had been but for a
very short time at all acquainted with Upton.

Now, if I can establish to you that he who
was directly at enmity with Le Maitre, that
between them the hostility bad gone to such
sn extent, that Upton had sent Le Maitre
a challenge to fight : If I prove to you, —
what has not been denied by some of the
witnesses for the prosecution,— • his animosity
to Higgins, and that in fact an inquiry was
commenced with great form in the society,
and was carrying on with great diligence, which
bad for its object Upton's expulsion from the
society;* I ask whether, under such circum-
•tanco, the probability is not strong against
the existence of such a conspiracy? — whether
you can suppose conspirators not only not
intimately acquainted, but hardly acquainted
at all?^whether in the case of men as little
acquainted as these men were, and living in
a state of direct enmity, you can suppose the
oonfidence of conspiracy to exist?— I ask
again, is it possible that such a proposition
can, consistently with the common niles of
human action, gain belief? If I prove these
thinffs,-^and I pledge ni vself so to prove them,
<^I then call upon you for this necessary con-
clusion, that the grand foundation, the prin-
dpal ground work of this great crime, name];f ,
the probability of the existence of a conspi-
racy, is destroyed, annihilated, and done
away; that, when the foundation is gone,
the superstructure must fall; and all that
m^ learned friend the attorney-general has
built upon it, all that he wishes you to infer
from the evidence' he has given, every cir-
cumstance which he wishes you to note as
inferring the guilt of the unfortunate person
at the bar, turns directly the other way.

iJVhen I shall have done this, I must then
call upon vou to apply the doctrine of lord
Coke, and lord Bacon— Then you must con-
aider if you have manifest proof— then you
must see that the lanthom of justice (the
evidence) is carried ch^sorly before your eyes.
. I know that in you Lain addressing myself
to twelve men of feeling, of integrity, of in-
telligence, of discernment, men possessing
every quality that can belong to the sacred
and important function in which you are
engaged; I am confident, therefore, that if
I establish in proof what I here state myself
to be able to prove, I shall efface from your
minds all idea of the existence of this conspi-
racy, and consequently of every thing that is
fououded and built upon it. But this is not all,
this telates only to the improbability of such
a conspiracy having been contrived bythese
unacquainted, jarring, hostile, conspirators.

* The Corresponding Society.
VOL, XXVL

I now request your attention to the proba-
bility of such a contrivance coming from
Upton. What was his situation f

His conduct was the subject of inquiry io
the society to which they all belonged, and
the persons indicted were promoting the in-
quiry: his enmity will be proved by com-
munication with the persons indicted, of the
most hostile nature. The whole tenor of hi»
life will hold forth a man, from whom, if he-
had appeared in that witness-box, you would
have shrunk back with horror. These, then,
are the considerations. What was the situa*
tion of this man? — What was the peculiar
time in which he spoke P What is the pecu^
liar art (as the histurv of all ages proves) of
men of tiiat description in such times and in
such situations? The man, such as I have^
described him, had no means of rescuing
himself from the obloquy of his associates^
but bv the fabrication of a plot. lie deter-
mined, therefore, to turn the mechanical ixx^.
strument, the air eun, to the wicked purpose
of crimination. Who can tell for wlut pur-
pose he might have ordered the air gun to be
madeP he was capable of preparing it for.
one vile purpose, and had address and art
enough to turn it to any other purpose that
might suit his interest, or gratify his revenge.
Such, then, is the position in which Upton
stands; and upon this ground I contend^
first, that there is an absolute improbability
of the coiispiracy existing at all, arising out
of the relative state of tlw parties; and next,
that there it the strongest probability that
Upton contrived it for his own purposes*

Gentiemen, what was the state of the timea
when these things pMsed? Is it possible to
forget the alarm which spread throughout
the nation at that period; an alarm, which
seemed at once to take possession of all ranka
and descriptions of men? It was in the
midst of that alarm that this plot was con*
trived ; nay, it was contrived at a particular
period of it. You will recollect that th^re
was a time when convictions had taken place
in Scotland of persons tried for high treason.*
The men in Scotiand were tried upoQ
the grouad that there had been a conspi*
racy against the government of thecoun*
try, to destroy the constitution, and by
legal inference, therefore, aiming at the life of
the sovereign ; these persons were convicted..
In this country persons were tried fur the
same crime, and those persons were acquit-
ted.f Gentlemen, I bring nothing into a court
of justice but the duties of an advocate ;
I make no observations here of a poli-
tical tendency upon the convictions in one

• See the trial of Robert Watt, an^^, Vol/23,
p. 1167, and the trial of David Downie, antl^
Vol. 24, p. 1.

f See the trial of Thomas Hardy, an/^. Vol.
94, p. 199, and the trial of John Home Tooke,
Vol. 85, p. 1.

II

99}

36 GEORGE IH.

country, nor upon the acquittals in the
other ;— but I slate the fact for this nraterial
)»urposey — that in the intervening time, when
the alarm had taken possession of men's
minds, when it had been raised to its utmost
height by the convictions in Scotland, after
the trials m England were ordered, but be-
ibre the acquittals took place, which tended
to relieve men's minds as to the reality of the
dHirm ; just in that intermediate time this
plot was brought forward by Upton.
• Such being the peculiar time at which this
discovery was made — mark the coincidence
of circumstances, — that period which will
be proved to you to have been the time of
discovery and accusation, will be proved to
yoti to have been immediately posterior to
th« quarrel and the challenge to fight be-
tween Upton and Le Maitre; when Upton
was roused, not only out of regard to his
personal defence and safety, but from every
other motive, to make the accusation. Here
then are three things which coincide rn es-
tablishing the strong probability that Upton
invented this plet for his own purposes — se-
curity as to his personal safety, the gratifica-
tion of his revenge, while the state of the
times sanctioned the inventtou, and secured
to him a reward. I desire you therefore to
examine all these different motives, carry
them in your minds, consider their nature,
sitid you wiU find, that although they are
different, they are concurring, and are mo-
tives which can consistently exist, and be in
aetion at the same time. — There is nothing
inconsistent in a person being urged at once
by a love of personal safety, by a spirit of
revenge, and by the hope of reward, to bring
to punishment persons whom he knew to
be perfectly and completely irinocent. And
mark how well the public mind and the
tone of society was calculated to encourage
a miscreant to bring forward such a contriv*
ance.

The history of the world proves such to
be the time and season for such informers to
bring their inventions into action. The his-
tory of our own country^ affords the most perfect
illustration of the period of alarm being the
season in which they may ensure success.

Recollect the description given by that
profound historian David IIuAie, of the state
of the public mind in this country at the time
of the popish plot. " The people," he says,
** thought their enemies were in their bosom,
and had actually got possession of their
country. £ach breath and rumour made
them start with anxiety. Like men affrighted
and in the dark, they took every figure fbr a
spectre. The terror of every man became a
source of terror to angttier, and an universar
panic being difl'used, reason and common
sense, and common humanity^ lost all in-
fluence over them.'*

In such a situation of the public mind, the
ialse informer considers himself sure of con-
victing^ and such was the consequence in

Trial of Robert l%0imf Cmsfidd [ 100

that period to which the historlati vefers;
when common sense and conunon hunsanity
had lost aM influence even over the juries of
the country. But the informer of the present
ace will not be so successfiiL Thank God 1
the judicial impovements of this coimtfy
since that perioa, the integrity of the judges^
the enliehtened minds of juries, the censci*
entJous deternination to distinguish between
guilt and innocence, the openness to receive
information, the abandoning all ideas of judg-
ing upon any facts or impressions except
those arising out of the evidence in the cause,
the disregara of all prejudices even the most
forcible upon the human mind, happily fona
the judicial character of the present times,
and secure the accused from unjust coavic*
tions.

I have now, Gentlemen of the Jury, gone
through, 1 believe, the circumstances of the
original history of this case, the situation
and character of Upton, the probability of
there being no sucn plot, because the con*
spirators were little acquainted with each
other, and wese at enmity with each other;
the improbability of such a plot, upon that
account, and the probability of there being
such a contrivance as that with which I
charge Upton to be the contriver. It is now
my dut^ to call your attention to the evi-
dence, m the diiterent points of view in
which it appears to me to be important.
I hope to execute this without being tedious;
at the same time, as this is the most mate-
riaJ part of the case, and as we are all en-
gaged in the discharge of a most solemn duty
here, I do most anxiously intreat your pa-
tience ; and I am sure, mv lord, and I am
sure you, gentlemen, will pardon me, if I
should rather be prolix than run the risk of
leaving any thing unsaid that may be for the
benefit of the prisoner.

The witnesses upon tliis occasion are of two
sorts; one set of witnesses was brought to
prove that an instrument, such as is de-
scribed in the indictnienti was prepared ; ano*
ther set of witnesses to prove that that in-
strument was meant to be used for the parti*
cular purpose laid in the indictment You
will observe, that these two classes of wit*
nesses speak to facts of a very different sort.
The one, those who prove the instrument^
speak to facts which passed before their ^es;
but with regard to any use of the instrument^
with regard to any colour given as to tlie cri-
minal purpose for which that instrument was
prepared, or any intended applicatiou of it>
they state no fact whatever : the other class
of witnesses speak only to declarations. You
will observe, therefore, upon this case, that
the evidence of fact only establishes the
making of a particular instrument (anair-gun} c
how far these facts bring it home to the pri*
soner, is a question for. me to diKuss, and for
you to try, while the evidence of confession,
or the evidence of declaration is that which
lends to establish the use of iU

101]

Jm Wgh Treaioti.

iiiAead dT ekammittg the evidence in the
oHer in which it was <»iled, I will take the
liberty of classiDg the witnesses according to
the ofierent mtiire of theit testimony, for
the fnirpose of applying their evidence parti-
cnlarly to these two distinct subjects of proof;
because diffeient observations, different rules
of probability, and difiierent principles, apply to
the one class of witnesses from those which
apply to the other. The first witness called
is a person of the name of Dowding ; that per-
son, yon will recollect, did not speak of any
ancfaine or mechanical instnrtncnt being pre-
pared, and he did not speak at aH to the pri-
sofliBT at the bar. He only said that three per-
scns rame, and that Upton was the principal
spokesman, and he particnlaiiy said, when it
was Btentiopfd that it was a secret, that Upton
was the person who said it was a secret; but
yon obso^^ that this person Itkewiste stated
a very material fact, nameiv, that they hag-
tied about the price, and thought it too dear.
Now I wish to call your attention coolly add
deliberately to that fact: mark what the na-
ture of the charge is^ — a terrible charge, if it be
a tnie one, bat one which nnist be bottonaed
in a design which has iBome view and object^
And h«B for its foundation something mor^
tban the meeting of four obscure individuals^
iat the purpose of contriving this extiaordi-
nary plot ; yet no evidence whatever is given
to yooy libaX tbe other persons named in this
indietment, or that any body else was at this
time concerned in it but the prisoner (if tbe
prisoner was concerned in it) and Upton. —
what docs Dowding say? he says, they
iM^^gM about the pnee; noed I ask you, as
mfcn capable of weighing the import of hu-
man actions and of human conduct, whether
it is a natotid thing, that persohs carrying on
iocfa a plot as this, — a pk)t fodnded, necessa-
rily, in an extensive phn of involution, — z.
plot aecoropanied with siicheircumstances, —
could be influeoced by the iprice of a small
metal tube? or that a few mllinss one way,
or a few shillings the other, could be at all ail
obiect } That fact, in my opinion, tends tb
eswlisl^^Btrong negative to the possibility
of tbetie MDg ai^ such thing eiistmc in the
minds ot these people, as tkuit which is at-
tempted to be inferred ; but yon observe that
Dowding proves ndlhing actually done, and
here is en end of ihy observation on Dow-
dine's evidence.

Tb^ neit person produced is BUiad { by his
evidence you observe that nothidg is proved
to be done ; only two were present at tl^t
cbltvervatlon ; Pahpier remutied behind, tnd
Pidmer accounted to you in his evidence why
be remained a short time behind, the two
others were there for the very short time
'While Palmer remained behind, in the house
with Bland. Palmer came and inquired after
them ; they were gone, but Bland could not
tell where. Palmer went into the street ind
saw thetn,aBd seeing them he ofertook them,
coBseqnettllt the eoiivefsatioD tcnld not have

II

A. D. 1796. [102

lasted above a very few minutes, but Palmer
was not present.

Now Palmer is supposed to have been a
person concerned in this plot. Palmer, as well
as Uplon,is supposed to nave been acquainted
with the particular object and design that ihe
prisoner is charged with. Is it not then a
very extraordinary tiling, and contrary to all
probability, that, in a scheme of this kind, — ^a
conspiracy to take away the life of the king,
which must be combined witli an intention
to overturn the state, — that the conspirators
in that viery scheme, that Mr. Palmer, a per-
son ushered in by the attorney-general ih
his opening ^eech, and examined by Mr.
Garrow, as if he had been a witness of mine»
and under cross-examination, and not a wit-
ness examined in chief for the crown ;-^that
of these conspirators. Palmer, who staid be-
hind ibr the reason given in his evidence (i
call of nature to stop), should not know to
what place they were bent next, and that
when ne did not find them in the house, it
was only by seeing them in the street, and
overtaking them, that he found his way to
the place whither they were next going.

I should wish you next to attend to the
evidence of Cuthbert. He is a person who
makes instruments ; he spoke concerning an
air pump ; Cuthbert has nothing to do with
the maknig of this instrument, nor with this
supposed conspiracy ; he does not give any
proof whatever of the fact of fabricating th\9
machine — ^none whatever. But he states td
you, that l^ie had occasion to go to Upton fof
a particular purpose; namely, to pay hini
money, which was to be paid over td tbe
wives and children of the persons who were
confined in Newgate, for the titeasons tbsiC
were formerly tried; that observing Upton td
be a watch-makor, he invited Upton to come
to his house to see some of his machinery \
that he soon discovered Upton to be a dis^
agreeable person; that when Uptoh called
the second time he took little notice of him *
that he remained upon his seat all the time ;
but he establishes this important lact, that
Upbn and the person who came with him
appear to have been most completely igno^
rant of every thing with regard to the power
of air ; and he proves, at the same tithe, that
they did not come there with the intent df
learning what the pbwer of air was. He he*
gatives that intent expressly, by establishing
Uiat Upton came at the particular invitation
of the witness Cuthbert.
' I say, then, there are conspirators contriv*^
ing a machine of destruction, who were igno^
rant of the very principles of the machine
which they were to use ; conspirators going to
the shop of a mechanic, not with a view to
learn the principle upon which this machine
was to be constructed, but going upon the
particular invitation of the person as a matted
of curiosity. There is another observation
which. I am sure you will make, when you
come to consider whether this case is proved

103] S6 GEORGE III.

Trial ofRaieH Thomak Crossfietd

[104

praoabfy or not, namely, that while Ctithbcirt's
testiniony is produced merely for the purpose
of^ving colour to their speculation, it proves
their ignorance of first principles. He does not
Drove that Crossfield was one of the two ; and
ne does not speak to the particular question
of the fabrication of the machine.

Gentlemen, as I am now upon the testi-
niony of this witness, I will state one other
circumstance. In answer to a question of my
learned friend on the other side, he said, that
when at the privy council, there was one
Dennis there, aitd that he, Cuthbert, did not
know the prisoner — be had not the least idea
of him— he only knew that a person' came to
his shop with Upton, but could not tell whe-
ther the prisoner was that person; but he
says, that Dennis was at the privy council^
when A person, whom Dennis called Cross-
field, walked through the same room, and
Dennis said, with ^reat anger, ** There he
goes !'' The witness asked, "who }" Dennis
•aid, ** Cross6eld ; damn him, I should know
liim if it were -his ashes burnt.''

I come now to the evidence of Joseph
Flint ; there again there was a short conver-
sation, and nothing was proved to be done ;
and he soeaks positively to the lame-man
(Upton) uein^ the spokesman, uid does not
Identify the prisoner.

Gentlemen, the next witness to whom I
ahall call your attention is Mr. Palmer. My
learned friend, the attorney general, in open-
ing (and certainly the manner in which that
witness was treated .corresponded exactly with
his opening) stated, that he mi^ht be under
the necessity ^f calling some witnesses who
aiood in a particular situation and connexion,
and therefore it might be difficult to obtain
the truth from them. , j^n observation was
made in the examination of that witness,
ivhich I am sure tnust liave made an impres-
sion on your minds, from the height trom
iwbicb it fell.* It was this, that tha crown
cannot discredit their own witness in any
thins, without losing the benefit of that wit*
pess s testimony.

I am not responsible for Palmer's conduct
or his character ; he is the witness of the pro*
secution ; but I will state what he proved,
and such observations as occur to me upon
what he proved.

You will observe, in the first place, that
Falmer ascertained this fact without leaving
any doubt upon the mind of any man who
heard him, namely, thatMr.Crossfield*s per-
sonal acquaintance with Upton was of very
abort duration; he could not even state it to
extend -to a month. This, you will recollect,
is one of the facts which I called to my aid, in
that part of the case on which I have already
addressed you. I refer to the improbability
of persons conspiring together for such a pur-
pose as this, without mutual confidence ; and
' ■ ■ ■ I. «■ III 1 I

* See vvhat was said b^ lord chief justice
Ejre, ata?, p. $7^

if any conspiracy requires mutual confidence,
it is that sort of conspiracy which is now the '
subject of investigation.

Palmer establishes another thing vei^ mar
teriai as to this desizn, and estwUshes it
without leaving a doubt; namely, that they
dined that day in the neighbourhood of Tem-
ple-bar; that it was mere accident which led
them to visit Upton ; that he went there for
tlie purpose of bavine a watch repaired ; and
that they walked with Upton into the city;
that, in short, this, so far from appearing to
be any thing like a designed, was a mere ac-
cidental meeting. He then states to yon, the
various circumstances with respect to their
goinj; from place to place; but he can etvc na
particular account of what passed on that oc«
casion ; and, as far as he goes, there certainly
is not any colour to say, that the instrument,
said to be in preparation, was either ordered
by the prisoner, or that he had any hand in
the oraering of it, or that he stood in any
other relation than that of an accidental com-
panion of Upton in those walks and inter-
views. Where Uien is the ground ibr the in-
ference of a guilty. design? With regard to
the particular use and supposed purposes of
the instrument, he says nothing that could
lead to a conckision, that, it was made with
the view and the intention laid in the indict-
ment.

Mr. Palmer likewise ]iroved to you the bad
state of Mr. Crossfield's health, the ruined
state of Mr. Crossfield's circumstances, the
situation in which Mr. Crossfield was before
this conspiracy is supposed to have taken
place, or at least before the discovery, and
that in which he continued to the time of his
leavinz England.

With regard to those last- mentioned par-
ticulars of Palmer's evidence, I shall pass
them over at. present^ because they, apply
more properly to. another part of the case,
which is most material for vour consideration ;
namely, the demeanour of the prisoner at the
bar throughout the whole of this transac-
tion.

Gentlemen, before I go on, permit me to
call your attention particularly to dates; I
wish you to remember, that Mr. Ward said,
that he first went td Mr. Pitt upon : Saturday
the ISth of September, that he saw him on
Wednesday the 16th. It will be proved, that
Le Maitre and Higgins were apprehended the
S7tb of 'September, that Smith was appre-
hended on the 88th ; and it will be proved,
that the advertisement offering a reward for
seizing Mr. Crossfield, was hot till late in the
foliowinz February. I desire you at present
to attend to those dates, because, in the se-
quel of what I have to address to you, I shall
be under the necjessiiy of making observations
of some considerable importance with regard
to them.

I now come to the evidence of Thomas Hill {
you will recollect he was the person employed
to make thp model ia wopo; you wHl ohr

W5]

for High Treason .

A. D. 1796.

[106

serve that, throughmit the whole of Hill's
evidence, Upton is the person who gives the
orders respecting the instrument; that Upton
is the person who said he should be paid ;
that Upton's is the House to which he carried
it ; that Upton is the person to whom he ap-

Slied for payment; and you will recollect,
kewise, that he had no knowledge whatever
of the prisoner; that the prisoner did not in-
terfere in the business at all, except with re-
spect to some directions in aiding Upton when
ht was giving the description, but he did not
seem to take any particular part in it You
will observe likewise (for I am sure I state
the evidence fairly and correctly), that all he
said upon that occasion was, that the stranger
might do something, but he spoke from a
hmx recollection.

If this has proved any thing, he has only
proved the existence of a model, he has not
proved the use of it ; so little has he proved
the use of it, that a scientific man, Mr. Mor-
timer, who wished to give us, last night, an
ostentatious sample of his scientific know-
ledge, unnecessaiV for the occasion, told you
expressly, that if he had been asked, without
<lescribing them, what use these models were
meant for, it would have been impossible for
him to have ascertained or even conceived
their use or application.

Lord Chiet Justice Eyre. — You misappre-
hend the evidence there, and making ooser-
yations on the evidence not founded in hct is
injurious to your cause.

Mr, Adam — I do not mean to misappre-
hend the evidence.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — He did not say,
that he could not have known the use of the
models ; but said, he could not have known
that these models were prepared from those
drawings..

Mr. Adam, — I am excessively obliged to
your lordship most undoubtedly. I asked
him, upon cross-examination, showing him
the roller, if he could have known, from look-
ing at that roller, for what purpose it was
intended ; I think his answer was, he could
not

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — You misappre-
hend him; he said, he believed it was for a
piston of an air gun, that taken together with
finding the tube, it was satisfactory to him
that it was so, but without finding the tube
it was not so satisfactory^, but that that was
hia opinion ; what he said with regard to not
knowing it was, the drawing was so bad, he
should not have known that the model was
prepared from the drawing, unless he had
been told that they had nad conversation
upon the subject.

Mr. Adam. — ^You have heard from my lord
the evidence to which I was alluding with
respect to Mr. Mortimer, and the observation
I have to make upon it as applicable to the
evidence of Hill is this — that Hill uudoubt^
edly, from Mr. Mortimer's evidence, could
jQot cojidude any thing as to the use of the

instrument. Hill being an ignorant man.
Consecjuently all that appears from Hill's evi^
dence is, that something was made, and you
will recollect, because it is important in the
sequel of wlmt I have to address to you, that
Hill, as far as I am able to trace the evidenc^
is the only person who speaks to the actual
fabrication, or who ascertains the actual
making of any part of the instrument laid in the
indictment ; I mean with this distinction, the
distinction of general confessions, upon which
I shall observe hereafter. *

The next witness, though not the next in
order, to whose evidence I shall call your
attention, is Mrs. Upton, and upon the
present occasion I wish merely to state this :
Mrs. Upton was called principally to prove
her hustMind's death; but she was examined
to some other circumstances, particularly to
some of the instruments produced having been
in the house of Upton ; and you will recollect
that she could swear to none of them but the
models ; that she could not swear to the draw-
ings, nor to the tube ; consequently, she car-
ries the formation of the instrument no farther
than Hill did.

With respect to what she said regarding
her husband, that I shall have occasion to
observe upon when I come to state the evi*-
dence on the part of the prisoner, which I
shall be under the necessity of laving before
you. I shall, therefore reserve that part of
her testimony to that part of the case.

Gentlemen, I beg leave now shortly to refer
to the evidence of Steers and Pusey, who
were called to show that Upton, at a meeting
of the Corresponding Society, had in his pos-
session something resembling the tube; for
that was all that the evidence amounted to.
Now, whether it was or was not the tube,
upon the view which I take of the case, is a
matter of no consequence. I bottom myself
throughout in the malignity and wickedness
of Upton's character; and on his character,
combined with facts and circumstances, I
assert, that he might have contrived such an
instrument for an innocent, an indifierent, or
wicked purpose^ without any connexion with
others, ana might af\erwards raise a story
converting it to the injury of others, for the

ratification of his own revenge. As long as
found my case upon that principle, I con-
tend that it is a matter indifierent to me, aa
standing here for the prisoner, whether this
story of the tube having been in Upton's
pocket was proved positively, or left in a state
of ambiguity and doubt. It does not come
home to the prisoner, he was not at the Cor-
responding Society upon the occasion. It
does not come home to any one of the indi-
viduals charged in this indictment, for not
one of them is stated to have been present
upon that occasion. In short it is a story
^ch relates distinctly and singly to Upton,
which belongs. to his wickedness and malig-
nity, which IS founded in the advantage m
thought to take of those be conceived to be

107] 36 GEORGE III. Trial ofRob^rl Thmcs Crossfidd

his enenies. The lube Nvas cunni^^y and
Mcretly shown by bim to raise suspicion ; not
opeAly produced, but peeking from under his
t»at; tbe very mode which fei false accuser
%ould adopt Therefore, I contend, that
every thing which is to be drawn from the
doubliiil evidetice of theft persons, with
Regard to the existence of this particitlar piut
ot the air gun, Mid what it was (for my lord
examined them particttlariy to what it was,
and t^y said, they rathbr beiieved it to be a
tube, but couM not speak certainly to it) is
evidence that can have no wetglit in this case,
«s far as it regaitls the prisoner at the bar;
vllat it proves, if it proves any thing, is, that
Upton was actuated by some black and vtn-
liictive purpose.

I cotne now to the evidence of Mr. Ward,
i^hich fnerel V proved, that he received inform-
ation of this supposed conapinicy irom
Upton ; that he oommunicaicd that informar
tion to his majesty's nnctslers, and that in
€Mi0e(|iiiencc of it, the several persons Were
committed at some subsequent time. — ^You
•wfll always observe, liowcver, something sin-
gular in this case ; that the information was
given on the 13lh of September ; that it was
not commiimcated, as appears, till the 16th :
kmi that none of the parties were seized till
the l^th, and that there was no reward offered
for apprehending the prisoner till the end of
Febmary ; — and $1 contend that the last is a
most important fact in this case, becanse, it
shows thatv whatever the diaboh(»l intention
trf* Upton might have been ; that whatever
the eircmttatances of the case might have
Veen at that time ; at least that they had not
■a idea that there was then evidence laid be-
ftT^tfaem to justify the seizing the prtsonef.
Therefore, when I shall come to examine his
demeanour, after the apprehension of the
three other prisoners, you will always bear
this in your mind, that no ground for eus-
pibion of Mr. Croissfield can be )>roved to
liave existed, until such time as his majes^^
ministers offered a reward to take him, other-
wite they most be supposed neghgem of their
du^.

Gentlemen, on the review of all this evi-
dence, I wish- to draw your attention to what
is proved with regard to what may be called the
hnstrnmentary part of the testimony, that is
to «iy, the fabrication of the instrument ; and,
I think, vou must necessarily agree with me,
that with Inspect to the fabrication there is
btft one witness who speaks positively to it,
and that one witness speaks only to a small
part of it, the tube. He does not 4peak at
all to the use, or to the purpose of it, nor do
any other of the instrumentary witnesses.
The single witness who speaks to it^ I say, is
liiM t and with regard 1x> the fabrlcltioo of
the other part, I mean the arrow, which forms
a most essential ingn^ient in this case, be-
OGLOse, withont it, the means M^ere not oomplete
<to life end, he says notbim^; I say, th^re-
■fbrd, that the uso to whibh tho itititiment

[108

was to be applied, rests entirely upon that
part of the ev}dem:e to which I am now
about to come, namely, the confesMonal evi<i>
dence,-^ihe prisonei*6 declaration.

Upon this part of the case, I conjure your
attention. I ahali endeavour to ihi^ress it
strongly on ^rour minds, beeause I am strongly
impressed with it mysdf. The nature of con-
fessional c\idgnoe,or evidence of declaration
Buch as this, is to be Well weighed in a qoestioii
of any sort. In a question of this particiriat
nature, wherto the overt act of fabricatioil
rests OB the testimoby of one witness dniy, I
shaH contend, ami i think successfully, that it
is not at all to be credited ; and that it is im>
possible for grave, serious, intelHgent men,
like you, laying yOur hands upon your
hearts, in solemn judgment upon the life oC
that mifortiiuate person, to say, that there is
that clear, distinct, manifest evidence, which,
according to my lord Coke and my lord
Bacon, amounts to proving an overt act of
treason pnovabfy ; for you are not, as lord
Coke tells you, to deal in probabilities, you are
not to deaX in conjecture but you are to
say to yourselves, m the solemn moment
of deliberation, do or do not these facts, prove
provably, manifestly, and incontestib^, the
guilt of the prisoner at the bar.

Upon the confessional evidenoe you win
observe, that there were four ^tnesses, Le
Bretton, Benfats, Wintfer, ahd Peilny. to
prove the declarations of the pri^oeer. — Per-
mit me, again and agam, to observe, that thifc
evidence of dedaratiOn, is Very d<Hibtful in its
nature. I am sure I do not advan<^e any
thing in v^h'nh I shall be contradicted by any
authority in this court, wb^i I say^ that it n
to be taken with great Consideration on all
occasions, as a proof of fact dr intention .

Gentlemen,' I have already called your'at-
tferilion to the important and significant
wbrds in* the statute of Edward the third.
I have read to you the commentary of
sir Edwwrd Coke, of almost equal authority
with the text. You find with what anxious
sdioitude he distinguishes between the words
probably and provably. Unless we acouse
that great lawyer of vagde, unmeaning ex-
pressions, we must affix a precise sense to the
word on which he dwells with so much force;
he mast mean the highest evidence of which
the nature of the thing is capable ; he must
mean what may be termed legal demonAra-
tion, such demonstration as parol testimony
dfoitls. Now I wish to present correctly to
youir minds the nalhre of sdch demonstration ;
It limounts to this, that if the witness speaks
truth, the fact to which he speaks must be
tnie. For example, in a case of high tl-easoii,
if itbe proved by an eye witness, that a certain
person has been out in arms, in rebeMioti
ag^nst the Sovereign, that fact is proved

fyfovMy ; it is proved to the fiill extent of
egal demonstration ; because if the witness
f^aks truths the fact must be true. But
"MPh^B avideddc is giva»ofcosfesa«m| observe

«wi

fif High TretuoUM

A. IX 1706.

[110

what th« naftura of it it : the person who.
gives the testimonv may speak truth, and yet
the ^t may not be true ; because the (act
does not depend merelv upoatbe statement
of the wilBcss, it depcnoB upon the stateroect
of another person, who has stated the thing
tn the witness. This doctrine, which cannot
he questioned, makes it fit to receive with
great deliberation, aodeven with considerable
hesitatiaa and doubt, att evidence of coutes-
sion.

But^ gentlemen, tliis- goes much fartlier ;
and the rules which goveni it are not founded
on any abstract principle of law, not in any
dtf&cuLt conception, or abstruse train of rea-
sonings but in phun conunqn sense.

Confessional evidence is sucli, that not
only th« person who makes the confession
■lusl be clear from all motives either of hope
or fear, but his mind must be so fashioned
and prepared, that you. shall believe what he
confesses ta be correotly and accurately true.
The person making the declaration must not
he led by hope, on the one hand, or fear on^the
othev, to state circumslances that may make
in his favour ; and the nunil which is to re-
ceive the confession, the; person to whom it
is made, must have an accurate, distinct un-
derstanding, capable of carrying it away with
precision, of reporting faithlully, without ex-
aegeration or misrepresentation. You will
observe, too, in all evidence of confession,
Ihe nature of it is such, that it is next to im-
posfiibie to convict for perjury on account of
such testiraonv. What is ihe secucity offisred
by the law^ that witnesses shall speak truth
in n eourt of justice ? It is tfiis, that they
come here under the lenror of a penal pros^
cutioa if they do not speak the truth. A
witness who ^omes to speak to a confession,
conies Ui give evidence to that which, from
Ihe very nature of it, cannot be negatived,
because it is impossible ta swear that a per^
SOB did not say such op such a thing; all that
can be said by a witness is negatively, that
he did not hear him say it : consequently the
person who speaks to the declaration, gives
Lis testimony without those risks of penal
proceeding; he is safe from the restraints
anil terrors of the law.

Now if you apply this general reasoning to
the pcesent case, observe how strongly it
bears upon it. ("onsider what the nature of
the question is which you have to try. It is,
whether the prisoner proposed to prepare
tlie instrument fur the purpose set forth in
the indictment. In other words whether the
preparation oi that inslriiracnt — an act inno-
cent in itst:tf» and which may as well be con-
oected wtlti objects of philosophical expcri*-
meut, as with a criminal use, — was under^-
taken for a particular cpimioal purpose, which
purpose is proved merely from the declara-
tions of the prisoner, for there is no other evi-
dence tending to impute the guilty motives
which actuated the supposed conspirators,
buch dcclarationti are;ab 1 have already stated;

evidence as to which it is next to imposuble
to convict a false witness of perjury. In ad-
dition to this, it is to be observed, that the in«
tention of the mind in this case is not like
the ordiuary cases of treason, in which the
fact (hke an act of rebellion), if proved, oob<«
tains evidence of the traitorous mind. \n
9>uch a case it is only necessary to prove the
|uct, and the intention is proved with it; but
in this case you have received proof of the £wt
of making the air gun, and the intentioa stall
remains unproved—^the proving a plan to pre-
pare an instrument does not prove a traitoiw
ous purpose as to its use— that must b»
proved by those who are supposed to know
the purpose. Now the proot of the purpose
rests in the mind, and in the character of
truth belonging to the mind of tlie witness
brought to prove the purpose, which cannot
be examined bv any external criterion tlM|t
will try its truth otr falsehood. Here again,
therefore, the witness is secure against a oon-
viction for perjury. So that in this case Ihe
security against false testimony is removed
in a double view ; first, as to the proof o|
intent; secondly, as to the testimony of de«
daration or confession; — and both unite ^
the case of that unfortunate gentleman.

But there b still another observation mail»»
rial for your consideration. We know how
very liable mankind is to exaggerate a story )
we know how rare it is for a story to be twice
told exactly in the same words. Now confias^
sion or declaration is a UMsre story told. 1£
the confession relates to a particular distinct
substantive fisLct, perhaps the witness may b^
able to bear it in his memory, if his natuse
does not incline him to falsify it ; yet if he
does falsify, it is not only difficult but impos-
sible to contradict him by contrary testimony^
but if the confession relates to something
loiter and more intricate than a particulav
fact, it is sure never to* be repeated twice
without some variation. Every day*s cxperix
ence, and ever^r common report, demonstrates
tlie truth of this«

There is a great difierence in confession, ac*
cording to the subject matter to which ittft
applied. If confession is applied to com-
mon and ordinary occurrences, in which
there is no motive for falsifying — or in
which the propensity to exaggeration (that
natural bias of the human mind) is not
necessarily excited, an attentive listener may
be a correct reporter. But consider how di{>
ferent this case is : here is a confession relat-
ing to high treason • a subject which lays
strong hold of the human mind ; here is a
narrative relating to the greatest, the highest
personage in the realm, upon whose exist-
ence tlie safety of the society in which we
live depends, who has displayed every virtue
during a long reign, anci wiiose life could
not bo violently and suddenly taken away by
traitors without exposing the state to the
most dreadful and calamitous consequences.
Wliat iHiljoa so likely- to lay hold of

Ill]

<ie GEORGE IlL

Trial of Robert Thomas Crossfield

[lis

the imaeinatioD, and to lead to the excess of
those failings which are incident, perhaps
ki such a case honourable, to our nature ?

• Consider, too, that the prisoner at that
time (for I shall have occasion to speak
hereafter of his demeanor) was in a situation
where he might be ftatlered with a hope that
particular representations might be favour-
able to him, and that he might thereby
alleviate that captivity into which he had
laUen.

• Gentlemen, I feel all this so deeply im-
pressed upon my own mind, I feel it so much
a part of my duty to be well founded in these
topics, that I am anxious to carry you beyond
the authority of the counsel for the prisoner:
1 am desirous to follow the example of my
learned friend, the attorney-eeneral, and to
show you from grave, legal auUioritv — not the
speech of an advocate, but the deliberate opi*
nions of judges, of the wisest and best law-
yers who ever dispensed justice in this country
—that my principles are correct.

The first authority to which I shall refer
you is Mr. Justice Bbuikstone, who in his
MHirth volume, in which he treats of crimes,
says, with regard to confession--*' But hasty
unguarded confessions, made to persons
having no authority, ought not to be admitted
18 evidence under this statute :" he is there
Ulking of the act of Edward the 3rd. Ob-
serve, gentlemen, I do not now apply it as it
regards the question of admissibility or
inadmi$sibility. The evidence is leeally ad-
mitted under the authority of the judge who
preside!} here. But I apply it as it rezards
the credit attached to the evidence, and not,
to its admissibility.

Mr. Justice Blackstone, on the same topic!
ffoes on to say— << But hasty unguarded con-
^ssions made to persons having no authority
oujjfat not to be admitted as evidence under
this statute ; and, indeed, even in cases of fe-
lony, at the common law, they are the weak-
est and most suspicious of aU testimony ;—
ever liable to be obtained by artifice, false
hopes, and promises of favour, or menaces —
seldom remembered accurately or reported
with due precision, and incapable in their na«
ture of bemg disproved by other negative evi-
dence."

Gentlemen, I again state tl\at I do not now
contend about the adm issibili ty of the evidence ;
I am only showing you how lawyers of great
eminence have laid down the doctrine with
regard to its being admissible pr inadmissible,
in order to persus^e you that in this case no
credit is due to the testimony laid before you.

I come now to the author relied upon by
the attorney-general— Mr. Justice Foster.

}le says '^ Words are transient and fleeting
as the wind ; they are frequently the effect of
sudden transport, easily misunderstood and
often misreported.** He, upon this occasion,
is not talking of words witn a view to their
being treasonable or not treasonable, but
when 1^ uses the marked expreMions to

which I have referred, he is speaking of pro-
secutions for seditious words. Now. if words
in one view are of that nature, all confes-
sional evidence, all evidence of declaration is
exactly of the same nature ; because all dc*
clarations consist of words. But upon the
present occasion, the declaration extends to a
considerable length, their weight depends
upon the precision and accuracy with which
the words are reported ; and I contend, there-
fore, that the doctrine applicable to words, as
laid down here, " to be easily misunderstood
and oden misreported," is applicable to
declarations and confessions of every sort.

In another part of his most excellent book,
he lays down the principle correctly and ac-
curately. In the case of Willis,^ tried for
high treason, it occurred to consider whether
a confession is evidence proper to be left to a
jury or not, under particular circumstances
which I may have occasion to state. Mr. Justice
Foster, aflcr discussing that case, which it is
unnecessary forme to trouble you with at pre-
sent, says — **• The reader sees that opiniOn»
have been various touching the sufficiency of
this sort of evidence" (that is the admissible
bility of confessions) ; '* but perhaps it m!^ be
now too late to controvert the authority of the
opinion in 17 16, warranted as it hath been by
the lale precedents ; all I insist on is, that the
rule should never be carried farther than
t case warranteth — never farther than to
confession made during the solemnity of an
xamination before a magistrate, or a person
lavins; authority to take it, when the part^
may be presumed to be properly upon his
guard, and apprized of the danger in which
he standeth, which was an ingredient in
lithe case of Franda f and of Gregg, cited ia
/the argument in Francia*s case.'' He then
igjoes on to give the reason, and he gives it in
Bis simple and eloquent manner — *' For hasty
confessions made to persons having no autho-
rity to examine, are the weakest and most
suspicious of all evidence ; proof may be too
easily prf)cured," — I bee, gentlemen, yoii
will mark the words : — *' Words are often mis->
reported; whether through ignorance, inat-
tention, or malice, it nmttereth not to the
defendant — he is equally affected in either
case ; and they are extremely liable to mis-
construction; and withal this evidence is
not, in the ordinary course of things, to be
disproved by tluit sort of nceative evidence by
which the proof of plain tacts may be, and
often is confronted.''

Such, gentlemen, is the opinion of the
author upon whom Mr. Attorney-General re-
lies, expressed in the most solemn and em-
phatic language, and enforcing the doctrine
which I have been laying down.
You see, from Mr. Justice Foster, that

* See Vol. 15, pp. 023 et seq.

t See it, an/tf. Vol. 15, p. 898; see also the
case of Berwick; Vol. 18, p. 367.

113]

fat High TreatdHi

A. D. 1790.

[114

there was a time when there was a question
with regard to the admissibility of that testi-
tfiony. Wherever there is a question as to
the admissibility or inadmissibility, the oom-
petencT or incompetency, of evidence, it ne^
cessariiy involves the question of credit. If
the question of admissibility is Eot over, then
the evidence goes to the jary, out it goes to
the ju^ cloggra with everv argument against
its credit that could have been applied to the
adnussibilky of the testimony — it goes to the
iuiy liable to every observation that could have
been made to the judge in order to prevent
him firom receiving it I am sure, therefore,
that I am in my proper place, when, upon
the efiect of this confessional testimony, I am
addressing you upon general principles, de-
rived from the works of learned and sound
lawyers ; deliberated upon and set down in
tfieir writings in the most grave and the
most serious moments, and inthecontempla*
tion of cases precisely similar to the present
Therefore, in the language of my lord chief
justice Hale (who lays down the same doctrine
with Foster, but whose words I do not trouble
jou with citing at length) talking of the bles-
sinos of our constitutional mode of trial, par*
ticmarlY applying it to treason. ** Juries are
not onhr triers of the cause, out they are
triers of the credit of the witnesses ; nay they
are not only triers of the credit of the wit-
nesses, but they are triers of the credit of the
&cts/'

Thas I come round again to the principle
from which I took my departure, namely,
that as matter of leeal demonstration, the in-
tention b not praoMly uroved^ because legal
demonstration is that oy which, if the wit-
nessspeaks truth, theiacts must be true ; but in
the case of confessional evidence, the witness
may speak truth, and yet the fact may be
ntteriy &lse«

The eflect of evidence of declarations de-
pends on two things — upon the mind which
conveys, and upon the mind which receives ;
and then it is to be weighed with a consider-
ation of those other circumstances, which I
have taken the libertjr of stating and enforc-
ing, namely, that it is unrepellable by nega-
tive evidence, that it is next to impossible to
convict for perjury on such testimony. — You
most well examine the character of the mind
of the persons who prove the confessions.
For in this case, gentlemen, you have an ex-
ample calculated to illustrate the doctrine, and
to warn you of the fallibility of this sort of
evidence. You will not forget the old man.
Winter, who came here to give testimony to
these most grave and serious declarations, in
which soundness of judgment, as well as ac«
curacy of memorv, constitutes a most impor-
tant and principal quality, of which indeed it
is the essence, who told you as matter of his
firm belief the racredibie story of the hare
having lived amidst the dogs, without being
touched by them. I ask ^, gentlemen, if
that D)an ought to be believed as to the con-

VOLXXVL

versatMp of the prisoner ? I ask yoo, if he
has a mind fit to be tnisted in a matter so so-
lemn in its effects, so delicate and so nice as
matter of evidence ?

I must anxionsly press upon jom minds
the doubtful nature of such testimony, be-
cause I am perfectly confident that honest,
just, and humane men, like you, will not
touch a hair of that man's head, if you are
convinced that the case is only probably
proved ; that you will require to be convinced
that it is provably proved ; that is to say, that
the facts upon which the intention depends
must be such facts as cannot but be certainly
true.

Gentlemen, Mr. Justice Foster says, in the
book which I have already quoted, ** evidence
of confession is corroborative evidence." What
does he mean by that expression ? — ^lle means
that it is auxiliary evidence. Auxiliary evidence
for what? to assist the overt acts previously
established. Does he not, then, when in
1746 he uses that word corroborative as appli-
cable to confessions — ** that they can only cor«
roborateor assist facts otherwise nroved,"—
mean to convey what lord Coke did, when be
said, a century and a half before that period,
that treason must be proved provabi^ f Mr.
Justice Blackstone connrms the doctnne ; and
it has lately been acknowledged by very hieh
authority in the place where I am now 8p«&«
ing.* I have, tnen, the whole history of the
law in my favour : I have the words of the
statute in my favour, and the exposition of
the statute as delivered by lord CoKe : I have
the doctrine of criminaljurisprudence, as car«
ried into a court of Justice by the enlightened
and great mind of lord Bacon, acting as pro-
secutor for the Crown: I have the solemn
opinion of Mr. Justice Foster: I have it laid
down by Mr. Justice Blackstone, with whose
eminence you are all acquainted, and whose
works are so popular that you, no doubt, have
read them : I have all these different testimo-
nies, confirming the doctrine which I have
advanced ; and I am sure when you come to
examiue this confessional evidence here, you
will with mercy and discernment, consider
again and again whether it is possible upon
such testimony to convict the piisoner, under
Such circumstances, of an intention so
proved ; when he stood in such a situation of
inducement to speak rashly, and when the
witnesses were so little Ukeiv to retain cor-
rectly what he may have spoken. I am sure
you will hesitate much before you permit
yourselves to believe such testimony.

Subject to these general observations, per-
mit me to state to you what the evidence is
which has been actually given. I have men-
tioned the four witnesses, Dennis, Winter,
Penny, and le Bretton. I have collected the
different modes in which they swear, with re-

• At the Old Bailey, 1786. Vide Leach's
Hawkinfs PI. Cr. Vol «, p. 604. wMe: ed.
of 1787.

I

115] 86 GEORGE IJI.

Trial of Robert Thomas Crossfield

[116

gatd to this particular point. As to \hf other
points of their evidence, that is a different
and future consideration. JLe Bretton says, he
heard the prisoner say, "he was opeoftJ)ose
^ho inycntipd the gun to shoot at his ma-
jesty." Dennis states that tlie prisoner said,
" the king was to he assassinated by a
dart blown thropeh a tube, and he knew liow
it was constructed.'' Winter swears he said.
" that he shot at his majesty, and damned
wnluckily missed him.'' Penny says, "that
he was one of the ring-leaders of the three
that attempted to. blow a dart at his majesty
in Covent Garden." Mark the discrepancies
in these accounts, and next observe what the
fact is upon which the indictment rests, and
upon which the prosecutors iiepend for your
yerdict of guilCy, According to their case a
conspiracy existed in September 1794, which
was discovered by Upton ; in consequence of
Upton's discovery, three of the conspirators
were arrested; Upton was not imprisoned.,
himself, because he w^s the spy and dis-
coverer; Crossfield was never mentioned nor
advertised till the month of February after;
in the mean time this plot, if it ever had any
cjiistence at all, was totally at an end.' The
positive direct evidence upon which my friend
must rest his right to call upon vou for a ver-
dict against the nrisoher, is this, that here
was a plot in whicn th'i^ prisoner l^ada share;
which plot was broken up and put an end to
by the arrestment of three of the principal
supposed conspirators in the month of Sep-
tember. In February Crossfield is taken into
Brest in a prison ship; there, in a dtuation
yfhcie such conversation might avail him
with the French, or he mijght think so, with
an impression on his mmd of that sort, to
these witnesses such as you have seen them
he gives four contradictory accounts, or ra-
ther they give four varying testiinonies. You
will obscrvej some of them suppose that ac^
attempt on the king's life had actually been
made ; some that it was only intended ; and
some suppose it in one way, others in another.
Now the fact upon which the cause rests, ac-
cording to the case of the Crown, is this, not
that the attempt was actually inade, b^ut ^hat
it was proposed to be made, apd disappointed ;
that the intent was never carried intp ^e-
cution, even to the length of fabric^tii^g ]tbe
instrumenU Does not this show you tby»t the
very testimon^^ in this case is ^ frail ap^l un-
substantial in its nature, t*hat it is impossible.
it should make an impression upon nonest,
jii&t, humane minds, ur ipinds of u4eljigence
and discernment ? Is it not clea^ /i^om this,
that all thje general doctrines w(iich are
written in tl^e &)oks, are most f^terial io the
eonsideration of ihis evidence,, and t|iat the
testimony now before you, is, as \i were, cal-
culated to illustrate the wi^doni of t^ose emi-
nent and profQund lawyers, and to show the
infinite risk of admitting such evidence?

Is a person like Winter, believing ^he most
Hdiculous and improbalHe stories, contending

II

even now before you on bia soleipn o^tby.
^mes^y for their truth, treated, as he himself
admits, like a person that was scoffed and,
jested at by every one, — is a man likeDenniSyr
who provea himself to have an enmity against
the prisoner, by his declarations to Cutnbert
at the privy council,— is a man like Le Bret-
tpn, who t will prove to you, attempted to^
persuade captain Clarkq to support bin) ia his.
suspicious testiipony, but from Clarke's bQ^
nesty failed in accon^pllst^iog his object,— ^
witnesses like these to convince you of the
deep guilt charged to the prisoner at the bar?
Are they to belield as having proved that an
ipstn^ment, the preparation of a sm^l part of
which is established by ooe witness only.
(Hi)!^, and the existence of which never waS;
proved at all; — wliich received qo crimiQaL.
complexion in this cause, but from the;s^ wit-
Qesses of confessions ;-— which receiv^ed x)0;
particular application frpm 4iiny of the wit-
nesses to tne prepajfation ;— was n^eapt for
the blac^ a^d, shocking purposie imputed by
the indictment? The confessions or the pri-
soner ^e cot^M^adjctory in themselves; directly/
adverse to the case upon which the attorn^y^
general must rest his cause. Qan you by-
possif)ility believe such coqfessioqs ? Qut the
case does not rest evjea heri^ : you have had
the evidence orpenny, or Winter, of Le.Br^tr.
ton,, and of.Dennis, with regard to thesitua,-;
tiop of the prison s^p^ and about the dif-
ferent persons who were in captivity; who, if
these thingS' were spokjeo, ipust have heard
them, because the;^ were the n^essmatjes an^.
intf mates of the prisoner. You will recollect:
above all, Le Bretton*s testimony, with regard
to captain Clarke ; and you will recollect i^ith*
what unwillingness, w&u^ I put some quea«
tiohs to hinpy Ee chose to admit that he k^:
any intercourse with captain Clarke at Mtsm
Smithes. You will fecollect^Le Brettpn'ste^
tim^oiyy under thes^ particular cjrpumstanc^s.
Here then are .four pexsons (whom I have al**
ready characterized, and I. wi)l not trouble,
you with chsu^cterizine ag^n),- ^hp swear to.
these confessions, anu^tqese four witnesses :
state, that there might bavip l^een thm tiii^^;
four witnesses present Hifh^n .the confes^oua.
^ere made, who all came to Bag)and in tb^r
cartelship, who knpw tb^ p^i^o^el;, wholived»
in intij;nacy. with him. who were lit^wisia.
men of eduf:atio^, and whci messed at tSip.
same tahle with him; all of whom m^ght
have heen hroughit bere in order to Mve.
proved ;tbis casfB. , ^

GexitlGme^, it was in the. power of the
Crown to have brought thei^ ; to whitt quarter
of the world are they fieaf»-^;Bibove all where»
is captain Clarke? — I cai^QQt conceive ^hy^
he is no^ here: he w^ es^min.ed to th^ ia^t.
The counsel for the Crown kpe.yr . hijs le^iti-:
mopy. It w^s impossible for >is to^ bring hiiQ
here, the pr^oper could not bear th^ ezpepsj^.
of hi? detention. But I wiU prove most.ilis^
tinctly, that a conv^ty^tjoh .passed bptwrfen-
lie ^retton an^ captain C\B^f9p wh^r^;b9.

iiri

fir High Trtason*

A. D. 1796.

[118

iffM][^ted t6 excife Clarke to ^ve evidence
against the prilsoher, wltich Clarke refused as
inc6iUilstent with the truth. That is not all,
but I stiind In this fortunate predicament ; I
fin capable by mere accident (for it was not
in fh\s power of this poor man to afford to
Ikecp the witnesses at a great expense ; they
might, bot for accident, have sailed from this
eountky),— ^I atn able, I say, to produce two of
the Witnesses who messed^ and constantly as-
sociated with the i^risbh^r. Now, mark the
stttetion ih which I inroduce ili^se witnesses,
tnd the arguMnt i^hich is t6 be derived from
lliis circumstance, with regard to this con-
i^s^onal testimony. In the first place I will
ftOY^ to you, fron^ these witnesses, that the
prisoner expressed gr^at cheerfulness at leav-
m Fntnce. la the next place, I will prove
mt he mfeht have vi^ry easily remained in
France, if ne hud chosen it. I shall tender
these witnesse^^ to the cro^s-ex'amination of
my learned friends; I know their powers
snd their abilities. I know the sense thby have
of theiff duty, and I am ready to risk the con-
firmation of their case by those witnesses.

I saVj then, if witnesses of the highest re-
sp^ctaDility to be f6i!ipd in the place at the
dme, proved to have been in the society df
Mr. Crossfield at the nme spoken to by th^
persons who ha^e been examined by the pro*
seditbr, are brought before you, and swear
that they heard no such declaratiohs; dbes it
not aihount very nearly to a negative proof?
v^efe thfev not the best witnesses to have sup-
ported tne prosecution? were they i^dtthe
persons who would be most likely to have re-
tained with fidelity the confessions, if there
had been any } You will retttemb^r that two
^ntlet^nof thename of Byron were men-
tibned, atad others whos6 names I need not
recite to you. All of them were brought over
in the cartel shiji. Where aire thos^ persons?
Gentlemen. thi!ir absence is a strong ciitHihi-
stiiiice in ravour of the prisoner r especially
when the positive testitnony is at variance
#ith itselfy and each Witness colitradicts the
dttier.

1 find it necessary, from time to time, in
older tliati may omit' no part of the seHous'
duty which I hkvc^ td discharge to my
cRen^ to summon my recollection that I may
be sltfe that nothing has escaped me; and
upon reflection it does not seem tlmt in going
o^er the evidence I have oniitted anytning
that iflighf be important for me to observe
upoif.' so iar as I have gone. II is a great
siftimction to me, to think that my learned
fKend who sits by me [Mr. Gurney], who'will
niake ikjy fbr mv deficiencies, is to have an
o)^r(bnity of addressing yoU after our wit.
nesB^ are cdled; and it is a still greater sa-
tisfilction for me to think, that the learned''
j^rsoni^who'pre^de upbnthis occasion; and
t^hibl^ opinions upon evidence are a^ en-
IMten^ and powerful as any that exist in
tMie enhgUtened timbs, or in any times, will
Ucveib cfpf^ittmity of dischlirging their dmy

towards the pr?sonpr, for ytfur aid and for
the furtherance of justice upon this occasion.

1 now proceed to a topic Which I have
placed last, not from the dread of encoimter-
mg it, for I am convinced that if there is any
Impression against the prisoner on the part of
the subject to which I now refer, that I shall be
able to relieve your minds from it; but I place
it last, because it seems its proper order — I
refer to the conduct and demeanour of the
prisoner, from which my learned friend, the
attorney-general, wishes to draw a proof of
his guilt ; — that is, he stales his conduct to
have been such, i'mmediatcly after the disco-
very and the apprehension of the other pri-
soners, as to lead to the supposition that he
from thai time, down to the time when he
was apprehended in Cornwall, was in such
places, and acting in such a manner as tO'lead
ilecessarily to a conclusion that he must be
guilty.

In the first place, I am sure, that is a con-
clusion which you will not be rash in draw-
ing upon such evidence a$ you have had^evcn
if therd was no answei'. to be given to that;
evidence. When a person is likely to be put

* in a' situation of peril, although he may not

• be guilty, he may wish to keep out of that si-
.tiiatioh of peril. Such conduct is perfectly
; natural, and therefore it is too much to say,

that a bad motive is aUi'ays to be imputed,
when, in point of fact, unless a bad motivo
is evident, the motive may be indifferent ; and
you ought to lean to the side of innocence^
rather than td a conclusion of gujlt. — But
consider what the n*ature of this gentleman's
demeanour was; he remained some days in
London ai\er he knew of the discovervof this
supposed plot ; he then went to Bristol. Now
the proof that is before you of his having been
sCt Bristol, is of this nature; he assumed no
feigned' name; ht retired* into no private
place ; he made ilb attenipt to leave the coun-
try; yet Bristol is.a sea-port town of the first'
resort, frdm which there is constant and facile
communicatibn to every part of the world ; to
neutral ports ;'to places where he nfiight have
ensured protection. Whereas, if you know
the South sea fishery trade, in which he after-
wards embarked, you must be aware that they
■ touch at no place ; and although they perform
a long voyage, they return to this country
without landmg any where. He goes to Bris-
tol', arid never attempts to leave the kingdom ;
l^e ilever secretes himself; he goes into places
of public resort, and dbes not change his
tfzmb. Compare Bristol with London. I
need ilot state to you (but it is ' incumbent
upon me td make every ob^rvation, however
ct)mmon it may seem) — I need not state, that
8f man at Bristol would be more easily disco-
vered than in London. It is comparatively a
Very ^mall place. He afterwards returns to
EoiSdon, and you observe it is the month of
Janukry before he embarks. He goes on
board at Portsmouth, the most frequented
seapoit town ill (be kingdomy whete there is

119] 36 GEOROB IIL Trial of Robert Tkomat Crot^ieU

[190

a ccmstant and numerous concoureeof his ma- |
jesty*s officers — persons naturally upon the
watch — a town where there is^ to the honour
of the chief magistrate be it spoken^ the
best regulated police that eiists in any
4own in the kingdom. Can you have an ima-
gination that a person should land under his
own name, and go publicly to shops to buy
things, in Portsmouth, who is sought after to
be seized by government; that he should not
conceal himself at all; and yet that his de-
meanour should be held criminal } They sail
from Portsmouth, and put into Falmouth;
from Mr. Le Bretton vou have it very un-
'willingly stated, that he went once a^shore
there, but under no concealment. If captun
Clarke had been here, I could most undoubt-
todly have established beyond contradiction,
that he lived very much a-shore with him; but
I have it not in my power to produce that
witness ; I may however be able, perhaps, to
establish the fact by other testimony. Ob-
.serve the situation of Falmouth ; it is the
most westerly port in this kingdom.; the
placed whence all the public packets go ;
It is a small town witn only one street;
where no nerson can conceal himself; it is
a place or constant intercourse with Loo-
.don; Uie resort of all the king's messen-
gers—the very persons sent to apprehend
those accused of treason ; it is the place there-
fore where such a person was more likely to
be taken than in any other place in the kmg-
jdom. You have it m evidence from the wit-
nesses of the prosecutor, that he did go on
shore once at Falmouth ; I hope to give evi-
dence of his going on shore more frequently ;
<but I can say this, upon the evidence already
given, that at this time he never changed his
name, and y£t remained there from the third
to the thirteenth of February, and all this
4ime it is supposed that there was an eager-
ness an anxiety upon the jpart of government
.to seize his person.

The vessel sailed on the 13th of February
jand was captured on the 15th. I come now
to a most important fact indeed. You have
heard the evidence of confession,thatis,decIa-
jations of the prisoner under the circumstances
■which I have stated. You have had evidence
likewise from the same witnesses, stating that
immediately upon the capture^ he expressed

feat joy at the idea or getting to France,
ou have this as evidence of declaration.-^
mark what you have on the other hand. You
bave the evidence of the fact itself— of what
fact ? Of a faa that he risked his life in a
.double view, where he might have been kill-
ed in the attempt, or where he must have
fone to inevital)le execution if he tiad been
iscovered. What was the attempt ? Apian,
tegether with the English sailors, to seize the
mariners and captam of the F^-ench ship
which captured them, for the purpose of es-
.<^ping— of escaping from whence? Of es-
,diping from France ; certainly not of going
fo France. I shall prove it more incomes-

tibly, but it is already upon the evidence that
the prisoner was one of those who joined in
that desien, a circimistance affording: an uQi
answerable argument formy client, oy est»-
blishing an act altogether inconsistent with the
loose declarations which have been proved.

What is the supposed declaration? His
eagerness to eo to France. In what circum-
stances are tne witnesses placed who prove
that declaration? They cannot, from the
nature of confessional evidence, as I have
already shown you, be convicted of perjury.
What was the doctrine of the great and
enlightened mind of lord Mansfield i* What
was nis uniform rule in ascertaining the truth
of parol testimony, during the long period in
which he presided with such eminence and
effect, in tne supreme criminal court of thia
country? What was it but tlus? Look to
the facts and circumstances, consider what
lawyers call the evideniia rei : observe the
transactions as they passed ; they never lie i
.consider if they confirm or rebut the testi-
mony of the witness. No ingenuity, gentle-
men, can twist or turn them ; no cross-exami-
nation can shake them ; no loose words can
vary them ; they carry conviction to the mind,
unanswerably. Then I have proved from the
mouth of adverse and unwiUine witnesses
^from that unwilling witness £e Bretton^
irom that hostile witness Dennis, who could
not restrain his enmity, but abused the pri-
soner as he passed through tu the privy cona^
cil room), tne important fact that Crossfield
joined in the scheme of the English sailors to
seize, at the risk of his life, the French ship,
with a view to release hiniself from French
bondage. I am sure if he were the man they
describe him, he could not have been im*
pressed with feelings to dictate such an act.
Would a man who is held up to you as jguilty
of every species of irregularity in point of
conduct and of immorality in point of opi*
nions, who is represented as entertaininc sen^
timents detrimental to the first principles of
this jconstLtulion, who is supposed to have
aimed at the life of his sovereign ; can it be
believed that such a person would have under-^
taken to be the first to enter the French
cabin, to seize the captain, that he might
avoid taking refiige in a country where be
might have been secure, and return to another
where he must answer for his crimes P No.
What would the natural conduct of such a
man have been ? He would have agreed to
the plan to seize the French ship, for the pur-
pose of discovering it to the French captain.
Does it appear from these witnesses, hostile
as they are, that he ever proposed to discover
it? No. He entered honestly into the
design, to release himself from French capti?
vity, to restore himself to Englbh freedom.

Gentlemen, this fact destroys all suspicion
of his guilt as to the crime imputed to htm;
shows him incapable of disclosing the de«gn
to the French, who in that case most un-
doubtedly would have jgiven him a fisvparablj)

im

far High Treamn,

A. D. 1796.

rite

recepttOD in France. He might then have
been reported to the Convention, as a friend
entitled to a reward for his services; he
might thei^ have commenced a communica-
tion with them to have forwarded their views
on his return to Bngland ; facts asserted but
not proved in any respect whatever.

Reflect, I beseech you, on the characters
and prejudices of the witnesses who prove the
matter which I have been discussing. Con-
sider the importance of it in all its aspects,
and then teli me, combining common obser-
vation on the nature of human conduct with
those learned observations on declaratory,
confessional evidence which I have drawn
from the pure sources of Hale, Foster, uad
Biackstone, whether, you can find the priso-
ner guilty? Teli me, whether even, con-
templating the levity of his character and
his aebaucberies in respect to wine, or opium,
or women, as they have been proved (but I
am not here, remember, to defend the moral
conduct of the prisoner, but to state reasons,
and I am persuaded unanswerable reasons,
why you will not suppose him guiltv of the
crime with which he is charged) ; when you
compare that fact with the nature of the con-
iesstons, is it possible to conceive that the
prisoner could be the man, to conceal a design
against the French captain, and to harbour a
design against the life of his sovereign ?

Gentlemen, I really feel now that I have
exhausted almost every part of this case, yet
there ase two topics remaining upon which I
must likewise suomit my opinion to you; and,
I. think, I can account for them in such a
manner, that if any impressions should re-
main on your minds with regard to them,
those impressions will soon to wiped away.
The first is his changins his name to Wilson
before he leA France ; the next is his conduct
upon landing in England. As to his change
of name in France, can any thing be imputed
to it at all ? You observe, from the evidence
of all the witnesses, that he was known by
his real name to every man that came home
in Uie cartel ship, and tliat he lived with
them constantly during their captivity. You
have it proved that he was a man in very diffi-
cult circumstances, as to his pecuniary afiairs.
Consider then the change of name upon any
rule or principle of common sense. His
name of Crossneld was perfectly known to
every body long before he left France. They
say It was not so generally known at first,
although Le Bretton admits that Clarke might
have known that his name was Crossfield.
Le Bretton savs, he knew him generally by I
the name of doctor; but he who had been
known oridnally by the name of doctor (the
usual appellation tor the surgeon of a ship
amons sailors) was universally known in the
French prison ship, by the name ofCross-
^Id — universallv known bv that name : ob-
serve what he does ; he changes his name,
.when he is to come to Enzland in the com-
pstny of the very persons viu whom he lived

under the name of Crossfield. It does not
appear that when he landed here, and was
taken at Fowey, under the Justice's warrant,
that he ever attempted to conceal his real
name. None of the witnesses who were brx)agfat
to prove the taking him into custody, at
Fowey, prove that he there called himself
Wilson ; on the contrary, he answered without
hesitation to the name of Crossfield, as Col-
mer, the constable, proved on his cross-exa-
mination. How does the prosecutor's case
stand then in point of consistency ? He first
declares his treason, he then makes known
his name, and lastly he takes a false name in
the full knowledge of all those whom he is
supposed to have made acquainted with his
crimes. Can a conclusion of criminality be
drawn from such conduct?

The other circumstance regards his conduct
upon landing. You have heard what the na-
ture of his character is ; you have heard of his
levity, and of his habit of intoxication. I ad-
mit that you have not^had it yet proved posi-
tively that he was very much intoxicated at
the time he was taken at Fowey ; but the
witnesses would not venture to swear he was
sober. Nay, the^ admit he was a little in-
toxicated. Intoxication is no defence against
a crime, but it is a clear defence against that
sort of conduct which is to raise an inference
of a crime. Although drunkenness will not
release a person firom the guilt of a crime ac-
tually committed, yet drunkenness, most un-
doubtedly, where you are only to raise an in-
ference from a man's actions, will weaken or
destroy any inference to be raised from his
actions. Now observe what he does after *^e
had the conversation with the constables.
His conversation, as you will recollect, was
pressing the constables who took him to let
nim go ; that the constables asked him if they
let him go how they should get rid of the
postillion; to which, they said, Crossfield
answered, "give me one of your pistols and
I'll pop at him.*' Immediately after this he
fails fast asleep, and he sleep&more than half
the way between Fowe^r ana Bodmin. Is it
not most extraordinary if this person was not
either inebriated, or m such a state that his
mind should receive no impression fit>m tiie
apprehension of the crime for which he is now
tried, tliat, after a conversation of this kind,
he should have fallen into a sound sleep, and
remained in it all the rest of the journey P
Here ajzain therefore I call upon you to exa-
mine tnis case according to the common rules
of probability ; and say, whether the conclu-
sion must not necessarily be that this strange
wild conversation was the efiiect of drunken-
ness.

I have, I think, gone through evefy thing
with relation to the evidence that has been
given, and it is now my purpose very brie^
to address you upon the nature of the evidence
which I sludl lav before you. I shall do this
^gentlemen very briefly for many reasons.

First of all| because I have consumed a

/

i«83

56 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomas Croufidd

ZIU

ereat deal of your time. In tbe nett places
pccaase my leatn^ friend (Mr. Gumey) who
GomoB after me^ I know will observe on it
afW it is giyen with peaX ability, and ^ith
great advantage to his client But^ gentle-
men^ there is a jpart of it which I am nndet
the necessity > of stating toyou very particu-
Urly, beotnse it relates to one of the main
and singular features of this case« YoO have
beard again aud again, from Mr. Attorney
General of the name of Upton; you have
heard that name from mai^ of the witnesses^
and from Mrs. Upton, the widow (as she
stated hersielf) of Upton. I hardly know,
gentlemen of die jury> how to unfold to
you the extraordinary circumsfances I am
about to mention. There was no part of this
case, I do assure you sincerely, that gave
roe more ankiety than the report that this

terson had been drowned, or was no more,
knew that if he had been brought here,
his demeanour, and those circumstances
that could have been proved against him,
would have completely satis6ed your minds
upon this subject, and that all those observa-
tions, which I have had the honour of ad-
dressing to you, ^ould have received addi-
tional aid, froOi his deportment, and from
his character.

The evidence of Mrs. Upton is, that her
husband's hat is the only oart of his apparel
which has been found, ana that he left a seal
with her the morning he went away. I could
not understand utrhat my learned friend, Mr.
Garrow, meant by interrogating her as to the
seal, unless it was to represent the delivery
of it, as a token of love and friendship, which
he left with a wife whom he was to see no
more, being determined to destroy himself.
I can put no other construction upon that
fact. Gentlemen, his hat has been found,
but Mrs. Upton did not say his body has been
found ; ana yet it is rare indeed if a person
has heetk drowned, that there should be no-
thing found of the body. A ltd it is more rare
in this country than in any other, because we
all know there is a legal proceeding upon all
events of that sort. ~

. It is certain that Upton has not appeared
since that day. Whether he will be seen
again in this world or no, I am sure I cannot
pretend to say ; but I am perfectly sure of
this, that I shall be able to lay before you
testimony, which will* at least amount to as
strong .proof of hia being' alive, as the evidence
given by Mrs. Uptonr is proof of hisdeatfa.

Mr. Attorn^ ueneraL — ^The Court stopped
me in this ; I only now lay in my claim to
answer tbe evidence if any such is offered.

Mr. Adam, — Gentlemen, I have received
the- intimation of my learned friend, as I re-
eeive every intimation from him, I am sure,
with great respect. I have considered (as far
as the moment will give me an opportunity
of considering); what courtie I shall steer upon '
this intimation; and, l have no hesitation
m BftyiDg to yoU| aAd in saying to my lord.

that whatever the wisdom of the conrt
may hereafler detemune, with regard to the
testimony that my friend wishes to pro*
pose upon that subject, I think it so es-
sential to this case in one pomt of view,
though not at all so in another, that tbe evi-
dence with respect to Upton's being alive
shoidld be laid before you, that I shall cer-
tainly think it my duty to offer it When I
say m one and not rn another respect, I will
state to my learned friend, how I do not think
it essential in one view: It is not from tbe
least idea that every diligent search, that every
active inqtnry which talents and integrity can
direct/ and industry and fidelity can execute,
has not been used upon the present occasion, ia
order to obtain this man, and to bring htm into
court as a witness ; because 1 know perfectly
well) thM my learned friend never states for ef-
fect, that which he does not mean to prove ; and ,
therefdre, when I say that I shall give evi-
dence which will raise donbts respecting Upton
bein^ alive, I say it without the least view
of raising the most distant suspicion, that
every industry has not been used to discover
him, for no person can pay any man higher
respect than I do the person who exercises
the fbnction of inquiry and preparation in
these proceedings. But in another respect
I think it ihost essential to go into the evi-
dence, and I think so for this reason : Be-
cause if I ean raise a doubt in your minds
with regard to the existence of this man, if I
can fasten upon your understandings a belief
that this man is not dead, but has gone out
of the way, if I ean raise a presumption that
the tieal was delivered as a trick and as a plan :
and that this man (who had committed almost
every other crime) had contemplated or
wished others to believe that he contemplated
to end his life by suicide, if I can establish
those things, I prove the foundation of this
plot to lodge in a character and to result from
a mind fraught with such infamy, loaded with
such opprobritnn, that I hardly know how to
find words to eifpress myself'^on the subject.
Therefore as this plbt has declaredly itsoriein
in Upton, I think it essentially necessary for
the interests of my client to bring forward thiv
evidence.

Gentlemen. I have already observed some-
what upon tnis evidence, and therefore, I
will not take up your time one moment longer
respecting it. When it is given, it will be
for my friend (Mr. Gumey) to direct yoUr at-
tention to itii efiect ; and if the case should
take the turn which it seems it may possibly
do, from what the attorney-general states, I
nniy have an opportunity again, perhaps, of
addressing sortie words to you upon the whole
of the evidence relating to Upton.

The other evidence which I have to lay
before yon,' I have-almost sufficiently pointed'
out' in the course of- what I have said. I
shall prodbce some witnesses, who were in
France; to the facts which occurred there to'
repel the confeasiooai evidence. I shall pt<h

125]

J^ High Trtttum.

A. D. 1796.

[IK

duce a variety of wiinessea to Uolon's charac-
ter. I sbalL pGodiice a variety of witnesses to
the circumstances of the times when the plot-
was contrived (though they are proved by the |
history of the times, and will be admitted). 1
shall call witnesses to the inquiries, the dis-
putes, the rancour, the animosity, and the
challenge between Upton and the other pri>
sooers, concluding wjth testimony to Cross-
field's good cliaracter, and there my case will
rest.

I have now little more to add. I have
however to return to yxni my most sincere,
and I do assure you my most gratehil thanks,
for the kind attention which you have been
pleased to pay to me during a very long ad-
dress, in a case in which. I have felt great and
almost unsupportable anxiety. .

I cannot fail to have perceived, from the
nature of the evidence, that prejudices may
have arisen in your minds, and in the minds
of those who beard the evidence, with regard
to the prisoner at the bar; for the evidence
certainly went to a variety of points which
tended to show the general dtspositinn and
tendency of his mind to be loose and regard-
less of what is right, but it does not show the
particular application of that mind to the
matter of which he is accused; and I am stiro'
that you will lay.aaide all impressions except
such as the evidence in support of the charge
necessarily makes upon you.

That unfortunate ;gentleman stands now
before you, after you have heard the evidence, .
to have his deliverance, or a verdict of guilty.
The whole form of my address has; I hope
been calculated to.impress soberly, seriously,
and I trust,, without /any. impropriety, upon
your minds, the necessity of a deliverance of
acquittal. Consider, gravely upon wh<|t this
cause principally depends. Recollect, that
there is no colour Whatever giVefi to the
treason in question but from the evidence of
confession. I will not weary yott wHh a re-
petition, or even wi^h a summary of arguments
upon that part of. the subject. I have relied
on authorities from times when men thought
with great clearness, and spoke wi^ great
iorce: borrowing from thpse times, in pre-*:
aenting to vour understandings the particular
duty which you have to discharge 'in this
serious case, I shall have recourse to words
more emphatic tlian any that my mind can
suggest.

Gentlemen, my lord Strafford, when he
was tried for such a crime, at the bar of the
House of Lurdis upon evidence such as you
have heard, said, with that venerable and
powerful eloquence .which belonged to his
superior mind: ** It is now aees since any
man was touched to s\ich a height, on such
evidence : we have lived happily for ourselves
at home ; we have lived gloriously abroad to
the world; let us not awake those sleeping
lions to our destruction, those sad precedents
of judicial disgr^e^ which have lain so many
ages by the wall forgotten and neglected.*'

Gentlemen let me apply these words to the>
present case ; let me iutreat you, not slightly,'
*' upon such evidence, to awaken the sleeping
lions to our destruction.'' What is evidence'
against one man may be evidence against all*
Ine case of every individual prisoner that
comes before a jury is the case of the whole
community, because the whole community
are interested in the distribution of justice^
and in th^ principles upon 'which juries decide.
This case, in that view of it, like every
weighly prosecution, is a very important one.-
In that view I intreatyou to consider it ; and,
withoutVdding one word more, I again, on
behalf of my client and myself^ return you
my sincere and humble thanks for the atten-
tion with which you have honoured me, and
I anxiously implore heaven so to govern your
minds, that you may deliver your judgment \n
mercy, by a verdict of acquittal.

Mr. Gurney, — ^We shall now call evidence
to disprove the existence of the conspiracy
charged in the indictment.

Mr. Jamei Parkinson sworn.— Examined by

Mr, Gurney. -

What is your profession P- — ^^A surgeon and
apothecary.. ...

Where do yoalure P-^-In Hoxton-sqnare.

Were you in the months of August and
September, .171)4, a member of the Corres-
ponding Society ?-*-Yes.
' Did you, at. that time, frequently attend
their meetings F'^The meetings of the com-*
mittee of Correspondence, not the general^
committees.

Was a person of the name of Upton a
member or that committee? — No.
s Was Mr. Le Maitre a member of that com-
mittee ? — No.

Was Mr. Uiggins a meuiber of that com-
mittee ? — lie was.

Was Mr. Smith a member ? — He was.

Were there, to your knowled^, any inqui-
ries instituted in that coiuroitlee, or in the
general committee, by either Le Maitre,^
Higgins, or Smith, respecting Upton?-— B^'
liiggins and Smith there was an inquiry in*
stituted, at the request of the committee ot
correspondence, among whom I was one, who:
was very solicitous for that inquiry into the
character of Upton.

NYhat was the charge which they then'
brought a^nst Upton? — ^It was stated either
by Mr. Smith or by Mr. Hodgson that he had
heard it reported that Upton had set his
house in Coldbath-fielda on fire.

Was that inquiry pursued to any consi-
derable length? — ^They were desired at a'>
meetuig of the committee to make the inquiry.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — You do not
mean, I hope, to detail to this Court the pro-
ceedings of such a committeo upon a charge
which ought to be heard here and not there;'
if you go to the point to show that there was
any enmity between Smitli and Uiggins and*
Upton, very well; but I beg, for the honour

Vt] SS GEORGE III. trial of Roieri Thonuu CfossJleU [Vt9^

of this Court, that we may not have their pro-
ceedings detailed here.

Mr. Gumey. — I only wish to show, that
the inquiry was instituted at the instance of
those persons; with submission to your lord-
ship, I could not come at the effect without
the cause. Were there, in point of fact, any
disputes upon that occasion between Smith,
Le Maitre, or Higgins, and Upton?

WUntit, — I c^n only speak of any dispute
that subsisted between them by the report of
Smith and Higgins.

That is not evidence. Did you, upon that
occasion, see Upton yourself?— Only once;
which was for the purpose of delivering to
him, or carrying a letter to be deliverra to
him, expelling him from that society.
i ^ Wen you at any meeting of the Corres-
ponding Society, at which Smith, Higgins,
Le Maitre, and Upton were present ? — At one
meeting.

Did anything pass at that meeting be-
tween these parties, either peaceable or hos-
tile?— Nothing particular.

Mr. Jamet Parkinson cross-examined by
Mr. Attorney General.

Are you the same Mr. Parkinson that was
examined here some little time ago? — ^The
same.

Are you the same person that produced,
upon that examination, a paper intitled, La
Guillotine, or George's Head in the Basket?*
—I do not know that it was produced in
court ; it was not produced by me.

Are you the same person that produced that
paper at the privy council? — I produced no
such paper at tne privy council.

Have not you bad in your possession a
paper called La Guillotine, or George's Head
m the Basket, that you got at that society ?—
I have that paper now.

Have you it about you?~I have it not here.

You had it here at the time of the trial I
allude to?— I had it.

Do you know a person of the name of
Pearce, who was a member of the society ?—
Yes.

Have you forgot that Le Maitre, Higgins,
and Smith, met at Pearce's, and were recon-
ciled over a bottle of wine? — I do not forget
it, because the gentleman who asks the ques-
tion told it me.

Do you or do you not know, that having
bad a quarrel they were reconciled, and met
at Pearce's upon that reconciliation?—!
heard that they were reconciled, but I knew
the place from the learned counsel, and from
no one else.

You knew that they were reconciled not
from the learned counsel, you heard the
place from the learned counsel as I under-
stand you?— I was informed they were re-
conciled before you informed me of it.

Lord Chief Justice £yre.-^tVbo were re-
conciled ?— Le Maitre and Upton.

^

* See this paper, and, Vol, 24, p. 68),

Mr. Gamfy.— He only says he heard it.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.-— Do you know
Hill, the turner?— Yes.

You had a considerable situation, I under^
stand, in the society you belonged to— yot>
were one of what is called the Committee of
Correspondence P— I belonged to the Com-
mittee of Correspondence.

Sometimes, I believe, called the Secret
Committee? — Once odled so in my hearing,,
by Upton, for which he was very much re-
probated.

Hill was a member of the society, was not
he?— He was.

Do you recollect going to HiU, afler some-
of those persons nad been apprehended.^
•"-I went to Hill for the purpose of gaining
all the information that I could respecting
this business ; I went to other places for the
same purpose, that I might give the privy
council all the information I could.

You never heard of any quarrel tAat
Upton had with Crossfield, did you ?— Never*

Did you hear from HiU any thing about
any models that an^r body had given him
orders for ?— It was in conse(|uence of Hill
having mentioned his uneasiness of mind
respecting something which he had turned
that I called upon him ; it was not until then
that I conceived there could be any thing i»
the plot.

Did he name to you, or to any body in your
hearine, who the person was that came to
bespeak the modek?

Mr. Gumey. — I submit to your lordship-
that is not a question to be asked.

Mr. Attorn^ Genera/.— I will not pursue
it then. Do you know Crossfield's hand-
writing?—No.

Did you ever see him virrite ?— Never.

Mr. James Parkinson re-examined l^ Mr*

Gumey,

You have been asked respecting some pftPfr
whkh it is said you got in the society. Did
you or not get that paper in the society ?«— I
swear positively I dia not.

Mr. Attorney General, — Mr. Parkinson, f
must beg of you not to go away.

John Bone sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Gumey,

What are you ? — A muslin clearer.

Where do you live ?— At No. 8, in Weston*
street, Sonthwark.

Were you, in the months of August and
September 1794, a member of the Cortes*
ponding Society ?— Yes, I was.

Were you a member of the general com-
mittee?— I was.

Was Mr. Upton a mem!^ of thai oommit-
tee ?— He was not.

Was Mr. Le Maitre ?— He was.

Was Mr. Snuth a member?— Yes.

And Mr. Higgins ?— He was.

Was Mr. Ciossfiekl a maahtnh
not

1^

fkt I£gk TreasMi

A. D. 179e9L

[1»

Da yod kn(f^ of snj ^poles bctvMD
Upton and imkhy HigguiB or lis Msitro^ or
^tber of them ?•*! do.

Whtn did ihese dispittes ongfaiBl6?<^I
canaol be particular as to the time when they
look place ; it wga some ttme after the com-
meneeoieol of August.

Hots long did they contimie ?— I never
knetl^ that th^j wese hiialed, hecause thej
orisinalkd lO Upton's bad character; ihey
bua bad o^niou of him in consequence of
that bad chaiaeirr, wbkh I never knew was
taken off.

Can yens recoBecl the days upon which
Smith, Hi^ASy and Le Maitre were taken
hpiu-I behevc it was on the 95lh of Septem-
bcr» or somcWhese thereabouts. *

Mr. Ganssy/-^i dare say the dates #ill be
ftdoMtted.

Mr. Altom^ Gtnertd^-^l rise-to state ttiy
aihniFsion of the times when these persons
wosie appsekaBded.

Mr.^Gnnugr.— Le MaHre and Higainswere
a]»mhendcd on ike eveniog of t^ srth,
and Sottlh on the evening of the asth.
Now, were those iinpiitations respecting
U^plcvs character supported by either Smithy
Biggins or Le Maitre ? — Yes^ they were by
South and HJ^ins, I know^; I never had an
opportunity .f» conversing with Le Maitre.
because 1 only saw him in the genefal com-
mittea.

Were yoli at any meeting when Le Maitre
and Upton were present?— Yes, in the ge-
neial committee.

ilt that time was theft any charee brought
by Le Maitm against Upton ?— 1 do not re-
eoUett that there was.

Was there any dispote between tfiem at
that time t — ^There was a great dispute.

Was that dispute caniS on with a great
dcme of ticdence? — ^Yes, on both sides.

Qm you recollect the date of that?-*
Yes; it was, I believe, on the 4lh of Sep-
tember.

Do you fecoUeot any of Upton's expressions
lespeeting Idr. Le Maitre at that time? — ^I
remember that Uiey quarrelled. That their
qnairel rose to a considerable height, and
Uiqf threw the whole assembly into a very
siaaft degree of agitation, in consequence of a
ifilter thai had Men conveyed into the ge-
neral committee, casting a stioma upon the
remmttteff and the society, which letter ap-
peared to have been written by Upton. When
the letter wae known to be written by Upton,
and he confessed it, Le Maitre was remark-
ably severe upon him ; he caUed him the man,
for be oonsldered him unworthy the name of
ci£iaea,attd thei^t he ouglu to be turned
eat of the eommitlee ; Uptoo^ in consequence
of this, broke out in a strain of abuse, and
used all those epithets which. men in the.
habit of abuse are accustomed to use.

Do yon recollect ai^ particular expressions
that he used?~No. .

Wen tiiey. expressions of ^ violent nature ?

VOL, XXVL

•^They weie violent ; Uplon threatened to
be revenged of Le Maitre; Le Maitre sakl^
that if he had ai^ thing to settle with him
he had better do it at another time than the •
present; and for that purpose he wrote his
address and gave it hinit.

Were you present at Siny quarrel between
Higgins and Upton ? — The same evening, in
consequence of Upton's Very disorderly beh»^
viour m the aeneral committee, a vote of
censure upon Upton was moved byUiggins
in the seneral committee; the committee
discussed the propriety of it; some were for.
passine the vote, others against it; but the
genermity of the committee being of opinion
that a vote of censure should be passea upon
him, Upton seemed inclined to avoid
the disgrace of a vote of censure, by moving
towards the door in order to go away^
Hisgins then rose, and said to the chairman
** ifyou are about to pass a vote of censure.
uponUpton; you must be quick, for he seema
to be hopping off.'^ Upton felt himself ex-,
tremely angry, and said. ^ You wretch, that
is a reflexion upon my natural infirmity.*'
Hie^ins replied, ** if he was to answer him
iu nis own dialect, he should tell him he lied.'
but it should suffice at present to say he did,
not mean it so.''

Upon that occasion, or any other, was
there any dispute between Upton and Smithy
—I do not recollect any dispute between
Smith and Upton ; but Smith, Higgins, and
myself, were members of the committee of
correspondence, where Upton's bad character
was first broached, and Smith and Higgins
were very active persons in getting informa-
tion for the committee relative to nis charac-
ter upon this occasion; Smith said, that if
Upton's name was continued in the printed
lists of the society, his name should not con^.
tinue in iL

Where you present at any other dispute
between Upton and those persons}— I do not
recollect that I was.

Were you present at uiy meeting subse-
quent, when any thing like a reconciliation'
is supposed to have taken place ?— Certainly
not.

. Was this inqcrirv, b^ Smith, Higgins, and
Le Maitre, concluded at the time ot Upton-'s
esamination, and of their examination? —
The business had come to a conclusion,
for auaht we knew ; for we had resolved to
publbh our lists without the name of Upton-
oeing in them.

Mr. Gtimey.— Then^in Oomt of fact, this
inquiry, thus puNued, had not terminated
till the night before their apprehension ?

Lord Chief Justice 6yre.— He mentioned
a fact, that the night before they had re«
solved to publish a list without Upton's name.

Mr. Gtfmcy.— Had the inquiry been pur«
sued regularly from its commencement till
that time?

..Lord Chief Justice £yre.— Ask him wlial
they did respecting it afterwards.

K

131] 36 GEORGE III.

Trial ofRoUrt Thoiiutt Gfot^M

[182

Mr. Gurntjf. — ^Do you recollect any specific
date, subsequent to the 4th of September,
"when any thing passed between Upton,
Smith, Higgins, and Lc Maitre ? — I do not.

But, in point of /act, the inquiry had not
terminated till the night hetbre his apprehen-
sion ? — It had so far terminated that we were
satisfied about Upton's character.

John Hut t ley sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Jdum,

What are you ?— A watch-spring maker.

"Where do you reside?— In Great Sutton-
street, Clerkenwell.

Did you know Upton, the watch-maker ? —
Yes.

How long have you known him ? — I had a
knowledge of him for about five years.

Did you see him about the month of Sep-
tember, 1794? — ^That was about the time.

Do you remember any conversation that
passed between you and him at that time ? —
I was in company with him and another per-
son.

. Perhaps you may recollect it better if I
tell you that a person of the name of Brown
"was present ? — He was.
' What was that conversation about ? — Con-
cerning the persons who had been taken up ;
Le Maitre, Higgins, and Smith.

What pass^ upon that subject between
you? — I walked oackward and forward, I
looked upon Upton to be a dangerous man.
and I did not care to be seen with him : I
heard him discoursing concerning these peo-
ple with Brown ; he said it was their own
faults, that he should never have troubled his
head about it, but they had made very free
'with his character : I said, perhaps they may
have known as much of you as I have known.

Was any thing more said about these peo«
pie?— No.

William Broun swom.-^Examined by
* Mr. Adam,

Do you know Upton ?— Yes.

Do you remember havinjg had any conver-
sation with him in September, 1795? — Yes.

What did it relate to ?— I was asking him
his opinion concerning Crossfield, what it was
that ne was detained for ; he said, God knows,
I cannot tell : he mentioned the place where
he was detained, down in the country, but
Mrhere I cannot recollect 1 1 asked him farther
if he knew what the chief accusation was
against him ; he said, he did not know.

Had you any conversation with Upton about
Le Maitre or Higgins ?-^Yes; I asked him if
he did not know liieeins and Le Maitre; he
said, yes, he knew Higgins, Le Maitre, and
Smith, they were three damn'd villains, and
had used him in the most villainous manner,
and that they were still continuing to hurt his
character in every place where he went, that
they had attacked him in the street, by eiving
him the name of informer, and abused him
in that manner, and had gathered a grM
numbet of people round him ; that he thought

his life was in danger bv them, and if they
did not desist he would take some other
means. I told him he should make an allow- >
ance, considering the ill-usage he had giveti
them, by laying an accusation against tbem '
apparently unfounded, as the prisoners had
been acquitted; he said, I was unacquainted
with the former part of the story seeminglv ;
and then he told roe he would relate the
whole to me ; he said, ** that prior to that,
when the state prisoners before were taken
up, some of their families being in want,
the London Corresponding Society chose to
raise subscriptions, to give some little aisist-
ance to some of the families, the^ thought it
convenient to open a imblic subscription, and
that among 1 he rest of the houses to be opened
for that purpose mine was one; that Higsins,
Le Maitre, and Smith came forward, ana ac- '
cused me as a thief, and a swindler, and an
incendiary, and the society refused to pve
me a fair trial upon it; and they still continua -
to go on in that abusive stjrle in public com-
pany." I told him that this accusation cer-
tainly could not arise from nothing: he said,
" he wouki tell me what it arose from ;*' he
said, '^ he did once Jceep a house in Cold-
bath-fields; that his house was burnt, and
that he was advertised, and a reward offered
for the apprehension of him— that he agreed
with a friend of his, that provided he would
give him a note of hand, payable to him, or
to a part of his family, for a part of the reward,
lie would disclose something which would -
brine him in so much money; accordingly
his triend did so, and his firiend delivered him
up to jostice;'' and he appealed to me to
know vhether there was ground for them la
accuse him in public for such a thing as that,
if such a powerful body of men as the Phoenix '
office, had entered a prosecution a^nst him^
and had not been able to prove any thineagainst
him, whether he was not acquitted in the eye of
the law, and whether any man ought to coine
forward and publicly accuse him. I ihade & •
reply, that there was room for suspecting him
to be a man of a bad character; and wmtfaer
he had broug;ht the accusation against Hig-
gins, Le Maitre, and Smith, from a good or
a bad motive, that it had done the society
good rather than harm, for the society hwd
increased in three weeks more than ever it •
had done before.

Mr. Adam, — Have you any> thing more to
say about Upton and la Maitre?— No.

Mr. Attorney Generak-'l have no objection
to any of these orators ; I am ready to admit
that Upton is what be stated himself to be,
when he brousht forward such a cbaigein
which he was the accomplice; that he was as
bad a man as you please; and I have no oh<»
jection to your taking his motive to be as ma*
licious as you ph

Mr. John Cleverton sworn. — Examined
by Mr. if (2am.

Wliere you a fariioaer at Biest, when Mr*

t,

133]

Jvr Hi^ TreatOK,

A. D. 1796.

[134

Crossfield was a prisoner there? — I was.

Did yoo live on board the same prison ship
with bim ? — I did.

For bow long a time? — From the 19th of
fcbniftfy till early in May.

Had you an op|>ortunity of seeing much of
Mr. Cro»s6eld during that time? — Yes, I was
oonstantly with him.

Were you with him at the time he came
away ? — ^No, I went tu the hospital ill.

Youramained behind when tie came away?
—I was in the ship after he left it

During your intercourse with Mr. Cross-
field, have you ever heard him make any de-
dars^ions respecting the king? — No, I do not
recollect any ; I have frequently heard him
sing republican songs.

Did you ever hear him make any declara-
iions respecting any plot? — Never.

You lived with him very constantly? — Yes.

Did you mess with him ? — ^Yes.

Who was at your mess? — Captain Clarke.

fie was the captidn of the Pomona? — Yes.

Mention the names of any others that you
t<ecolIect? — Captain Bligb.

Is be in England nowl—I believe he is at
Bxeter, Mr. Dennis, Mr. Denton, the mate
4»f captain Bligh's ship.

Do you know whetner be is in England? —
I bdieve he is at Exeter.

Who else? — Mr. Widdiman, the n»ate of
the ship I was in.

And you were all at the same mess toge-
ther?— Yes.

Mr. Cros^eld used to be very jolly ? — Yes.

I be^eve it was a custom there for persons
who were sick on board the. prison ships, to
be can^ied ashore to the hospital ?-^Yes.

Did it require any serious illness ta be car-
ried on shore to the hospital?— No, I had a
slight illness, and went to the hospital; I was
in the hospital from the 18th or 39th of May,
till sometime in July.

In consequence of that you did not come
over in the carte]?-— I cain^ over in the same
cartel.

Could you have avoided coming over in that
cBXieU — I did not try, I wished to come over.

If vou had -rather wished to have remained,
cotdd not you have remained there?— I can-
not tell that.

Should not you, upon a representation of a
alight illness, have been carried to the hospi-
<air— Yes; several persons had been carried
to the hospital, two or three da^^s before we
xrame away, and consequently did not come
over in the cartel.

Did you come in the same ship with Mr.
Crossfield?— I did.

You koew h^m perfectly well by the name
of Crossfield? — ^Yes; he signed his name as a
witness to some papers of mine.

At what time was that? — Early in May ; a
little before I went to the hospital.

Was he generally known, in your mess,
hy the name of Crossfield ?^We always called
J^iin 4pctor, in tb^ mess,

Btit his name was known? — Yes, it was to
me, because I saw him sign his name.

You called him doctor, as you woidd any
other medical man? — ^Yes.

Was he the only medical man in your mess?
— He was.

How long were you in your passage over?—
Three days.

Were Le Bretton, and Dennis, likewise in
the cartel? — Yes.

Did you ever happen to see them and Mi*.
Crossfield together? — Never particularly en-
gaged in any conversation.

Do you remember seeing them particularly
together in Brest harbour? — ^No, not more so
than others.

Did they live in that sort of intimacy that
you could suppose Mr. Crossfield told them
any secret? — ^They were intimate, captain
Clarke, and Mr. Crossfield and them, the
early part of their time.

How came Dennis ajid Le Bretton not to
be so intimate with them the latter part of the
time f — I understood it was from a vratch that
Mr. Crossfield had of Mr. Clarke's that he
would not give up to him.

Did you ever hear any conversaUon between
Le Bretton and Denms, and Mr. Crossfield,
upon the subject of what was in the Pomona^
at the time of the capture?— No; but I
heard Crossfield say, that he would take this
watch.

Mr. Crossfield then continued in your mess
till the>ei7 last; did he mess with you in the
cartel as you came over?— No.

Where,did you land? — ^At Fowey, in Cora-
wall.

How did Mr. Crossfield appear, at the time
of coming away from Brest? — He appeared
to me to be very glad that he was coming
home.

He did not show the least unwillingness to
return, did he? — ^No.

What is your profession and situation in
life?— I was going out agent to the Canaries.

Fpr whom? — For a house in St. John-street.

And you were captured ?-*-Yes.

Did Mr. Crossfield drink hard?— Very hard*

You were going out agent to the Canaries'?
— ^Yes, I was going out ror wines for govern-
ment.

Mr. Johu Clever^on^ cross-exanwned by
Mr. Attorney General.

You say Mr. Crossfield appeaaed to be very
glad whei^ he was coming home ? — Yes.

Perhaps you might have been by when ho
said, just before he came away, that things
had been all settled now to his satisfaction? —
I do not recollect that expression.

Were you .by when he was mustered by the
name of Wilson? — I was in the ship, but I do
not recollect his being mustered by the name
of Wilson; I heaitl he had put his name down
as Wilson in the list, but I never saw it.

You frequently heard him siQging (epubU*
can songs i'^Yes, , ..

135] S6 GEORGE Ilf,

Trial ^Oobert l%imuu Croiifidd

im

Did that oocaaion soy quarrels among you?
—Never.

Do you recollect a song, with a chonis that
b^an, PJant, plant the treeP-^I do.

Mr. Attorney GeneroL^^Be so good as read
that [giving a paper to the witness}, and tell
tne whether you ever heard the pnsouer sing
that song }

Mr. A4ani, — Does your lordship thiok this
18 evidence ?

Lord Chief Justice £yre.— -I do not know
whether this song will amount to any thing;
he has said he never heard the prisoner say
IViy thing about the king.

\Viinei$,^l do not recollect whether th^t
is exactly the sons he sung.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL-^l ofier it both to
prove the fact the witness has already sworn
of singine republican sdogs, and olfer the
Inatter of It as part of the prisoner's declara-
tion upon that very subject. Read it through,
jshd tell me whether fou have any doubt
p^bout it.

HHrnefS.— I have no doubt.

Mr. Attorney Gmeral.-^Then I ofTef this
ps evidence.

[It was read by Mr. Shelton.]

^ 2l®» ^"**^°^ *®®j that rising bekm,

The Eastern skies adorning ;
TSUr freedom's sun begins to gteam.

And wakes a glorious morning.

Kpw despotism 6tim France is chas'd.

And church iUusiops vanish'd,
l^e'er Jet them in our iaie be placed.

But far from Britain banish'd.

C&0I117S;

plant, plan^ the tree, fair freedom's tree.
Midst danger, wounds, and slaughter ^

Jfiauih patriot's breast its soil shall be,
And tyrants blood its water.

ffb^ cpme, they cprae, sec iDyriads come.

From Qaliia to invade us ;
•Beiae^ sei^ the pike, beat, beat fhe drum.

They cpme, my friends, to Bid us.

ILet trembling despots fly thie land,

To shun impending danger;
We'll stretch forth a fraternal hand,

Tp hail each glorious stranger.

Cbobvs, Plant, plant, the tree, &c.

That palace which for ages pas^

To despots was appointed ;
The sovereign people claim at last,

For they're the Lord's anointed.

The useless Crown which long adorned.

The brows of Royal Ninnies;
To nobler purposes is turn'd.

Coined into useful euineas.

Cfloavs, Plant, plant the tree, &c.

These high nicknames Lord, Duke, and Earl,

Which set the croud a ganng ;
Ave prii'd as hogs esteem a pearl,

Th^ir pa|eQt» sel a bM^g.

No more they vote away our weatth,
To please a King, or Queen, Sir ;

Now glad to pack away by stealth,
Tp ^scape the Guillotine, Sir.

Chorus, Plant, piaot the tree, 5te,

Our Commons too who say forsooth,

They represent the nation ;
Must scamper East, West, North, and South,

To 'scape our indignation.

Their Speaker's mace to current coin.

We p^senllv shall alter;
And ribbands late so gay and fine,

We'l) ehaage for each an baiter.

Chorus, Plant, plant the tree, fyi^

On holy mummeries our boys.

Contemptuously shall traniple;
Add yonder dome that props the skies.

Shall turn to Reason's temple.

Then 9 jL ira, each corps shall sing,

To chear the broken hearted;
And Priestcrafts bells no iQore shall ring.

To thundVing guns converted.

Chorus, Plant, plant the troe, &||»

Behold the Bank its specious trash.

Unworthy our regaitling;
Mere paper wealth, ideal cash.

Whole poutids not worth a farthing.

The Stocks like vapours on the hills.

Shall vanish from ouf sight. Sir ;
And Abraham Newland's swindling biHsi
May coyer paper kites, Sir.

Chorus, Plaqt, plant the tree, &e«

ThoseXawyers see, with fiice of brass,
And wigs replete with learning;

Whose far-fetch'd apophthegms surpass^
RepubHcaDs discemipg.

For them to ancient forms be sti^ich,.

To suit such worthy fellows ;
Oh, spare for them one legal braoch,

{ mean, reserve the gallows.

Chorus, Plaqit, plant the tree, if^

lis done, the glorious work is done.

Rejoice with one ailother ;
To plowshares beat the swwd and guD|

For each man is your brother.

Detested war shall ever cease,

In kind fraternization ;
For all is harmony and peace.

And all the world one nation.

Chorus^ Plant, plant the tuee, &ib.'*

Mr. Attorney Oenera/.*— Was the ch^nit
sung at the end of each of these verses,
'* Plant, plant the tree," &c. ?— I do not r»^
collect whether it was or not.

You remember the chorus?—^} remember
the chonis perfectly well.

Perhaps you may have a recoUeetkm of
some other songs sung by the prisoner r^— I
do not immediatdy recollect any.

Favour me with casting yoor eye ofer that
song ? [showing the witnesa another puper].*—
I dp not recollect his eiDgii^ t!4» sc^.

137]

jBit High l^rtmoiu

A. D. 17d6.

[13B

Mr. Mn Cleottion re-examined by Mr. Adam,

Gas yott take upon jourself^ positively, to
awear, that these were Hie words of the irst
iBDgthathe rang?— No, I cannot; I never
heard him sing it above onte or twice, and I
paid very little attention to It.

And for aught you know many of the verses
may have been transposed ?*«>They might,
hot I cannot say. ^

iix, Anthony Colling 8wom.-^£a^nme4 by

Mr*AtUm.

Were you in the prison-sihip, at Brest, at
Ihe ttme Mr. Crossfield was there ? — I was ; I
eomnanded one of them,

I understand that they were English ships,
and tb^ had put English captains on boara
to command ? — No, we were cartels, wie were
detained there for a lon^ time ; they thought
prejier to convert the ships into prisoa-thips,
ana in consequence of that we were filled full
of then.

Was Mr. Crossfield one of the prisoners on
'koard? — He was; I heard there was a me-
dical man on board one of the other ships, he
was not theii on board my ship, and I made
application to the commandant , and he granted
me the liberty to invite him to come on board,
to take care of the sick prisoners, which he
did with great care and attention ; and I am
confident he saved fiAy or sixty lives, from
his great care and attention ; during tbe time
be was on board he lived with me In the
cabin, along with several other gentlemen.

Do you recollect the names of these gen-
tlemen?—There were two brothers of the
name of Byron ; there was captain Lambton,
captain Tavlor.

Do you know whether the Byrons are now
in Engjland ?— One of them is now at Ports-

pMMlth.

Was he a captain of a ship?— No, a pas-
aencer.

wliat rank of life is he in ^•»A young man.

And a person in the same station of Hfe
thai yoo yonrself are?— Yes.

Do yott know where Mr. Taylor is now ?^-
ffo.

Captain Lambton?— 'Ha is now at New-
ssutle.

Do you remember any more gentlemen
tr^e were on board ?^Not at that time.

Did yt>u live in great intimacy with Mr.
Cpam%e\d ?— We did so.

Yott say he has a eood deal of skill in his
profession ; but independent of that, what
aert of chmcter is he^I dfd not Icnow the
ften liefoiie.

' Did the gkos go pretty frsely round ?— Our
situation was such, that for want of better
eusoloyment it did so.

DidT Mr. €ross6eld ever say any thing to
ymi i|bout ayiy plot he vras concerned in ?'^
During the thne he was in my comnany, I
aoienmly protest, that not a word of tne kind
^Ma ever mentioned about plots, or any thiog

ngmsX his mjyeaty or tba (oyenupaaU

Do you know an old man of the name 6f
Winter?— I do, he Was one of Ihe mess at
that time whenever he chose to come.

Do you remember any stories of Winter's
telling?— Oh, yes, a number of silly ftt)hsli
things he used to tell.

Du 3roM recollect any particular story about
any animal that he caught?— Oh, a number
of foolish stories of that kind, I remember
several ; one was, of his catchins tbe devil in
tbe shape of a harep and such ridiculaus nen*
sense as that

Did he say, that be took this hare for the
devil ?— He certainly did ; and was very mucdi
displeased when we contradicted him.

xou take upon ;^oarselfto swear, that he
used to say that this hare was the devil ?—
Yes, that he believed it to be so; and not
only that, but be told another story of tba
same kind.

He was, in short, a man who dealt in the
poarvellous ? — He did ; and he was the coni»
mon laughing stock of the whole ship*s crew.
Indeed, from his own conversation I believed
he was somewhat flighty at times ; I under-
stood that he had lost a cood deal of proper^,
whether it was from tnat, pr his lmprisoilb>
ment, or one thing or another, but f redly
believe at times be was; in sborL the sailors
laughed at him. I have known him myseU^
walking the deck, and taUung to himself a
whole night, I haveeot up treauentlv and
seen him walking and talking to lumself the
whole night; he was a man that slept very
little, he was the last in bed, and the first up.

Was not Winter a person you used to mwe
^ sort of butt of? — He was.

liOrd Chief Justice llyre.— He said he was
tbe common laughing stock of the ship.

Mr. Adam. — Had you any conversalioti
with Winter upon the subject of Mr. Croaa-
field? — ^No, never any private conversation of
any sort, for he was a man not of the cast ibr
me to converse with.

Mr. Antkn^ Gsf/taf crosa-examined by Mr.

Law.

You were particularly Intimate with Cidss^
field ?— Yes, as livine with him.

He would probably tell you the reasen of
his leaving England?— He never did; 6nfy
mentioning his pecuniMy circumstances that
they were deranged; in short, he Yi^d llo
money, and has luked me for a little.

He never mentkmed a word of what matfa
Inrn leave Enghind rather suddenly f^^Nor
that he had left Engkmd suddenly ; only that
he was taken in a ship going m the Soutli

As the grog went about pretty fVeely, T take
for grant^ you had songs ?'^W<s sung af
couree to pass the time awav.

Were the songs orderly, favourable to good
government, or what?-^l da noi recoUeet jasy
songs against the government.

Yon never happened to hear Utn tAtf^ a
sengy tne dmnia of wlAch wa$

139] is GEORGE HI.

Trial qf Robert Thomas Cross/leld

[140

*' Plant, plant the tree, fair freedom*^ tree,
'Midst danger, wounds, and slaughter ;

Each patriot's breast its soil shall bd,
Ana tyrants blood its water."

You never heard him sing such a song as
that? — ^I do not recollect any thing of the
kind.

He was quite another sort of man? — Yes.

Probably his usual song was God save the
King ? — I do noCrecoliect that.

Rule Britannia ? — ^That of course was sung.

Have you heard him sing Rule Britannia f
—I cannot say I have heard him sing that,
but in the company wc have done it.

But you never heard him sing any song of
a seditious, or bad tendency ?— I have not.
' And you never had any communication
from him of the reason of his leaving Eng-
land?--No.

pid ^ou happen to know by what name he
ytZ3 mustered, when he came for England ? —
I was informed he had put down a different
name.

Did not you think that odd? — ^From his
circumstances being in a bad state in this
country, I supposea he did not choose to be
iaiown.

You understood it to be to orotect himself
from any inquiries of his crcaitors ; ^nd not
to screen himself from any inquiries of go-
vernment ? — Yes.

And his behaviour was uniformly that of
an orderly and good subject.^ — Yes.

And you wer^ with him every day from
April to August ? — ^Yes.
' He was rather remarkable for the decency
of his conduct, a man you would rather de-
scribe as eminent for his loyal tv ? — As to his
political principles he never said any thing in
that respect, except reprobating the war, that
it was an unjust one.

But in other respects he was a man of emi-
nent loyalty ? — ^Yes.

.Str. Anthony Collim re-examined by .J^.

Adam,

You sung songs to divert the miserable
time you p^sed in captivity ?--- Yes.

Did Mr. Crossfield seem miserable as well
as the rest P — He did at those times and mo-
ments when he was serious ; I likewise have
heard him say that he had orders from the
commandant to stay in the country to super-
intend the hospital, which he thought proper
to refuse, as wishing to return to his own
country ; he told mc that not only once, but
several times; to superintend an hospital
called I^ndernau, which he said upon consi-
deration he refused, as he wished to come to
liia native country.

Mr. Lam, — Were you by when he said that
every thing was settled to his satis&ction ? —
He spoke French, and of course I did not Im-
derstand him.

Did you ever hear him say what had been
settled between him and the people at Brest,

which was so much to hb satis&ction.'—- No*
thing at all.

You never heard him say any thing had
been settled to his satisfaction? — No.

You did not hear what terms were settled
between thf m at the time of his coming away,
that induced his coming back to England ? —
No ; when the prisoners were to he released,
he seemed to be rejoiced.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — Did you happen
to know Mr. Cleverton r— X had some know*
ledge of him.

Lord Chief Justice JByre.— Was he ever on
board your ship?— Not more than once or
twice; be did not stay on board; be was on
board one of the other ships : he was I think
part of the time al the hospital sick.

EU^abeth Smith 8wom.*^£i;^mined by Mr,

Aim.

Are you a married woman ? — ^I was; but I
have been a widow eight years.

Where do you live f — ^No. 17^ Great Her^
mitage-street, Wapping.

How long have you hved there ? — ^I have
lived about eight years in that house,

How. lone did you live in the house you
were in berore?-^About seven years.

Was that in the same part of the town ?«^
In Red Lion^street, Wapping.

So that for the last fifteen years you have
been a constant resident in Wapping, in two
houses?— Yes.

Do you know the prisoner Mr. Crossfield ?
— Yes, I do,

How lopg have you been acquainted with
him ?-r-Five years.

Havfs you seen much of him during that
time? — ^Yes; he has been very often to and
fro to my house.

. Have you seen enough of him to know his
disposition or character ? Is he a man of le<r
vity, or a very serious man? — He is a man of
levity.

Is he a man of a severe hfMTsh temper ?-<-
No, quite the reverse.

Do vou know captain Clarke who was cap*
tain of the Pomona ? — Very well, he lodged
with me.

Huw long have you known captajn Clarke?
— About two years. Do you know a person
of the name of Le Brettop? — ^Yes.

How lon^ have you known that person?-^
He was before the mast with captain Clarke,
and so he used to come to the house; cantain
Clarke had my first floor; capt^n Clarke
and his wife boarded in my house.

Do you remember Mr. Le Bretton coming
to your house at any time to see captain
Clarke, since captain Clarke returned from
France ?~ Yes.

About what time was that?— I cannot ex-
actly s^ ; but I believe about ten days afler
captain Clarke led my house to go to Yar-
mouth, coming from.the prison ship.

Were you m company with those persons
at that time ?^Le Bretton called upon me^auA

Ml]

Jor High Treason*

A. D. 179(5-

[142

told me I might expect captain Clarke that
Dt^htyfbr he had been examined at Guild-
ball or somewhere, and he had wrote for him.

Did captain Clarke come? — He did.

Were you present with captain Clarke and
Lc Bretton ? — ^Yes.

What did he say to captain Clarke ? did he
ask him whether he had ever heard this, or
DO? — Le Bretton said he had heard Mr. Cross-
field describe a gun to him in the presence of
captain Clarke, and he said to captain Clarke
you were present at the time; Le Bretton
said he had heard Mr. Crossfield describe it,
and that captain Clarke was present at the
thne ; captam Clarke said he never heard it.

Did any thing else pass upon that subject
between you f — Le Bretton said several times
he hoped be would hang him.

You have known Mr. Crossfield I think
you say these five years ; did he ever lodge at
your house ? — ^Yes.

Under what name did he lodge at your
bouse? — ^Always under the name of Cross-
field.

At what particular time did he lodge at
your house?—- He has lodged at my house at
three different times.

Name the times, if you recollect them \ —
About three years ago ; the last time that he
lod^d at my house was about a month before
Cbnstmas ; it was in the beginning of Fe-
bniary when he joined captain Clarke's ship
at Portsmouth ; he dined on Christmas day,
1794, with captain Clarke at my house ; that
waa the day captain Clarke lci\ my house,
but Mr. Crossfield did not Join the ship at
FortsoMuth for five weeks after that.

Wbene was he all that time? — In my house;
he used to go to 'Change with captain White,
ai gentleman who lodged with me at that
time.

Did be use to go about with captain White
and other gentlemen? — Yes; to the 'Change
and different places.

Mr. Aiiorney GenerML^You taw him there ?
—I did not see him tliere, but he used to go
and return with the gentlemen.

Mr. Adam, — I^Ie used to go about without
any concealment? — I never knew of any con-
cealment.

Were you present when any thing passed
between faim and captain Clarke respecting
hts gc»ng to the South Seas ? — Mr. Crossfield
came into the house one day, and captain
Clarke was speaking to a gentleman to re-
commend him a surgeon ; Mr. Crossfield in-
^ired where he was ^oing, and said perhaps
be might go with him ; that is all that I
know.

What is your opuiion of Mr. Crossfield's ge-
neral character ? — ^He is a very good natured
lOan^ that I am sure would hurt nobody.

Did Le Bretton say any .thing farther about
captain Clarke's having heard this matter
that passed with respect to the plot?— No.

Did he press captain Clarke upon it? — He
two or tliree times that he was present.

Elizabeth Smith cross-examined by Mr.

Wood,

Did Mr. Crossfield lodse at your house
before he went down to Portsmouth ? — He
lodged at my house two months before.

And up to the time when he went down to
Portsmouth ? — ^Yes ; he went some time the '
beginning of February.

You endeavoured to learn Aom Le'' Bretton
and Dennis what they had swonx before the
privy council? — ^No, I never asked thefn a
question, nor I never heard Dennis say any
thing, but I heard Le Bretton say that to Cap-
tain Clarke.

But have not you asked Le Bretton and
Dennis what they had sworn before the privy
council? — No, I never did; and bewiU not
say that, I am sure.

Have not you endeavoured to persuade Le
Bretton to be very favourable to the prisoner?
— ^No, never.

You never applied to him for that purpose ?
— Never.

Nor ever said a word to him upon that 8ub«
ject?~I never did.

Let me put you in mind ; did not you tell
him that the truth was not to be spoken at
all times ? — I never did.

Remember you are upon your oath ? — I do,
and I am speaking the tnith.

And you never said any thing to that effect
to him, or to Dennis? — No, to neither of them.

Mr. Ifbwf.— They may be called, and I wish
you would recollect yourself?

WUneu. — ^They may, and they will clear
me if they are.

Mr. Wood, — ^Then you say you never inter*
fered with them to be favourable to the pri-
soner, nor said that the truth was not to be
spoken at all times, nor to that effect ? — ^No,
never ; I had never seen them.

You had never seen them ? — Not since that
time, they were constantly about the house
then, and that was the time to speak of it*

Mr. Adam. — I am going to call a witness
for the purpose of proving that Upton is now
living.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — We have had
some evidence with respect to Upton. Unless
you go the length of proving that Upton is
alive, and is kept away by one side or the
other, no observation in my judgment arises
upon it in this case — it will remain an un-
certainty whether he went away to avoid
being now examined, and what were his in-
ducements if he did so; or whether Uiey were
inducements that moved from the side of the
prosecution, or from the side of the prisoner;
or whether it was purely the effect of his own
feelings— now all that being left perfectly
uncertain, as fou do not open that you can
prove that he is kept away ; it seems to me
as if that inquiry was really quite beside Uiis
case.

Mr. Adam, — Will your lordship permit only
for the sake of slating the ground • ■■

U5] 96 G£0RG£ to, tiial^ttobirt Tkomu CnuffidJ

tiU

X4>rd Chi^f Justice Eyre^rrV fon Mak it
yi^t tacall these witnesses, hating admitted
some eridence on the other side, which per-
hilif was rather admitted by way of aaticipa-
tipn than otteHVise^ I mftywAyi sball not
stop you.

]4r*.4f'of«^ (7e<fra/.— ther^ is otfq c)r-
cumstajMe material for my learned friends to
be aware of^ as in the nature of the thing
this is evidence respecting a fact which has
taken place since a copy of the indietment,
ayd the na^oes of the jurors, and of the wit*
DfSfles weie jeliverea to the prisoner; this
noU^t must arise, and it is a «e# point in the
nistoryofthese sort of trials, namely, whether
I affi Qot at liberty to call witnesses to proye
tbe death of Uptpn, which is a fact that has
Impened sinfe |he list of witnesses has b^eii
denVered to the prisoner ; I apprelicnd I can
ctjh tliMe iritnessea; I take fw granted Mr.
Aoam will mi make an objection.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. — Witnesses whose
testianeoy arises from the evidence on the
other side, can hardly be supposed to be
'witfaijin thfi gleaning of the act ot parliament ;
because^ by no possibiliw can you know be*
for4uMMl that you should need such evidence.

Mr. Adum-'-'l wisU to stale it in such a
manner as to have it very distinctly under-
9^^904— I am perfecdy satisfied of this, and I
am really anxious (though it may be a little
OMi of course) to declare that I am persuaded
every parson concerned in this prosecution
thrpMgfvoMi the whole, ii perfectly incapable
of douig such a thing; and I should be ex-
tremely sorry if any thing that I state to the
jury, or now address to your lordship, could
pnsiwWy attach my name la the supposition
of sucb a thing existing, and therefore most
undoubtedly I cannot avail myself of that
ground — iui|Bely> that I bring this evidence to
prove that there have heen measures taken
to prevent Upton's coming here; I certainly
iaP9Mt s^ that to be the gvound, because
every coavictioiiy andevety fbeliag tJliat I

Sve, is pierfectly to the contrary : then it re-
«es itself exactly to this, whether your
lordship thinks, strictly speaking, itisevi-
dme tbat ought to be admitted or not, I cer^
Uwly wiM not g^ve your lordship the tnouble
^ #icussing the question.

Ix)]^ Chief Justice JByre^-^YQu do leeiy
tightly, beeause examining witnesses whose
cvideiM:e has not a clear application to the
cause o^ puxsles the case.

Mr. wwn.— In a case of this sort your
lordship vill fbi^ive me for oSving this evi-
4snoe.

Imi Chief Ju^ce Ejfrs^^l have no Qlm«-
Uan to eveiy tbina being staled^ end $mdd
and civing you m thA asaistanco I c^m to
fUAUEa yoiitt) pMdui:e eveiy thing you ought
iQproduoe.

EiiMttbeth Wai9on swom<^ Examined by Mr.

I Did Mr. Crossiekl, the gendemfltt aft ibt
bar, live with yoa?— He k>dged in my
house.

Under what name did he lodge in your
house? — By the name of CrossfielU.

You always knew him by that name? — t
did.

Did he lodge in your house in September,
and October 1794 ?— He came on the S6th of
July 1794, and continued as n6ar as I can re*'
member aboul two months.

Of course you knew a good deal of hi^
flianoer and #ay of life; was he a manf
that was remarkably careful of his papers ot
any thing i — No he had nothing locked uj^.
wmle he #as in my house.

Did he pass by his own muncyand go about
every where publicly ? — Yes.

How k)Qff have you known him?— I never
knew any thing of hiqa till be came to lodger
in my bouse.

When did he leave your house ?— -I cannot
' ascertain the day; he went about the end of
September, or the beginning of October.

He did not come Sack again te lodge witb
you ? — ^No.

EHtahttk Watson cross^xamined by Hry
Attorney General.

Did he visit you afterwards?-— No; I
have never seen him since he left my house*

He did not pay you any visit at any tioM
about Christmas^ Jamiary^ or Febvuaiyi or
afterwards? — He did not.

Do you recollect whether inquiries wera
made at your house about him?— No in-
quiries were made after him after he left my
house.

Margaret BeaO^ sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Adawi.

Do yon know Mr. Crossfield F— -I hare
luiowB him about four years.

Have ^on known him intimately ?— Yes.

What is your opinion of his character ?•—
I never knew any thing against his character*

Do you know whemer he is a humane,
gaed-natured man?— I have always under-
siDod so, and always heard so.

Mr. Wyld sworn.— Examined by Mr. Adam*

Do you know Mr. Crossfield ?— Yes.

Uow long have you Icnoim him?— Ahoirt
tfaseeyearai

Whatisyomr (pinion of his character ?•*-{
always thouglit lum of a good character*

For hia good* nature and ^humanity. ?-?»
Tea^ I always thougbl him a man of tua«
manity.

What ia yoor profession?— A surgeon.

Wfifiie do you liva?«f*-Ia the Kent Eoad.

M^ ^mfmWiban 8#ora.-«£xainined IjifrJ

Adam*

VikU are yiu?— ▲ sumeyor ia Dorset*

WhasadDyouUTe?^;did

buildings.

kDyttr'a^

Do you know Mr, CmsfieU?— Veiiy walk

145]

for Hsgk Tnason^

A. D. 1796-

L146

How loiig haYB you known him?— <£ver
aince I ranember any lhui|;.

Do you know him suffiaently to know hia
character ? — ^Yes.

What is your opinion of his character ? —
I always tnought him an exceeding good
man.

Incapable of committing any crime? — I
never thought he would commit the least
crime.

He is a hunume man ? —Very much so.

Mr. Hepburn sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Adam,

What are you? — A surgeon.

Where do you live? — ^In Great Hermitage-
street.

How kng have you known Mr. Crossfield ?
—Four years.

Have you known him intimately ?— I have
been often in his company, I attended the
&mily where be lodged.

What is your opinion of his character ? — A
very easy good-natured man, extremely so ;
too good-natured.

Mr. Xoww— We wiU call Dennis and Le
Bretton again.

Tkamoi Dennit called again. — Examined by

Mr. Imw.

Were you in court while Mrs. Smith was
being examined just now ? — I was not.

You have not heard what she said?— No.

You know Mrs. Smith ? — ^I do.

Have you had any conversation with her
iboal Cro8s6eM? — ^Not since I was first exa-
mioed before the privy council.

Did she ever make any enquiries of you as
to what you had said on your examination ? —
She did.

Are you sure of that? — Yes, I am confident
of it.

Didshe seem in any manner anxious toknow
what you had said upon that examination?-^
Quite so; she asked roe what I knew about
Crosafield, and she said she hoped I would
not declare anv thing that woula hurt him ;
I dined with her, and very warm disputes
there were after dinner ; there were three or
four captains there and myself; and she said
she. would say any thing .to save him, and not
to hurt him. .

Was there anything : said about whether
you sbould or not say truth at all times ? —
Not before me.

Mr.:4ifai»to EHzabdhSmith.'^Ii what this
man says true ?

Mra. Smith.T-l never examined him as ta
what be had said.

Mr. Admn^^Did you ever ask him to do
what he lays you asked him ?

Mrs.iSMi^Ijiever.askeclhim to favour
Mr.Crossfidd.

Dcmiif.-^)aptain Smith, who dined there,
tot into a veiy warm dispute, and said Mrs.
Siiulh,-yoaoat;bt to be athameci of yourself
for saying such a word.

VOL XXVI,

Mr. Jbiw, — Who is that captain Smith ?

Dennis. — A gentleman in the African trade;
he lodged with this good lady, at least I learn-
ed so when I dined there.

Lord Chief Justice Ej/re, — Who wereth e
other gentlemen there at dinner at that
time?

Dennis. — Captain Clarke, captain Smith,
and a youn^ gentleman that had apartments
there, I believe he was a wharfinger; I do
not know his name.

Mr. Law, — As I find Le Bretton is not here,
we will not detain the Court; but with your
lordship's leave we will examine him after
my learned friend has summed up the evi-
dence for the prisoner.

Mr. Gurney, — Gentlemen of the jury ; The
evidence for the prisoner being now closed, it
becomes my duty to address you on his be-
half; and I need scarcely state to you the ex-
treme awfulness of that duty. Even my
learned friend, Mr. Adam, when he rose to
address you, felt himself most deeply affected
by the circumstance of standing up, for the
first time, in defence of a person accused of
80 great an offence : what then must be my
feelings, who am far from having the advan-
tage cither of his ability or of his experience ?
I, however, feel myself encouraged by the
consideration, that the able and eloquent
speech which he delivered must have made
such an impression upon your minds as to
render it less necessary for me to solicit your
attention, or to detain you, for any length of
time ; and to make it less likely that the pri-
soner should suffer, as I fear he mUst suffer,
by the inability of the advocate who has now
the honour to address you.

I confess, gentlemen, there is one iHirthen,
from which in this case I feel relieved, namely,
that there is not any question of law by which
your minds can by any possibility be en-
tangled. It is purely a question of fact upon
which you are to decide ; that is to say, whe-
ther the fact has been substantiated by legal
proof, so as to call upon vou to find the pri-
soner at the bar guilty of high treason.

Gentlemen, it has been correctly stated to
you that the crime of high treason is the
most heinous and the most atrocious crime
which it is in the power of man to commit.
It is so inasmuch as it aims not only at hu-
man hfe, but at the life of the sovereign,
whose death might plunge the country into a
state of anarchy and confusion, and conse-
quently bring upon it incalculable miseries.
The life of the king being of such high import
to society, the law has provided peculiar pro-
tections for his person ; it has enacted, that
even the compassing his death shall be equal
to that whiqn in other cases would be the
completion of the crime^r-the actual murder.
By tne act of S5 Edward 9rd, which is the
statute upon which this indictment is founded,
treason is defined to be — ** when a man doth
compass pr insiagine the death of our lord

L

1473

36 GSOttGB in.

Trial o.

t%omatCnufiM

im

the king, and thereof be wawMy attainted
of open deed by people of his condition.''

Thus far the law bad provided. Mid wisely
provided, for the protection of the pefton of
the kins from lawless violence; in succeeding
times l£e legislatore was taught, by melan-
choly experience, that another important con-
sideration remained, namely, to protect the
person of the subject from unrigpteous vio-
Jenoe imder the rorros of law; it therefore
provided fences to guard the subject firom
unfounded accusation of high treason. A
subsequent statute has enacted, that a person
shaN not be convicted of high treason unless
there are two witnesses to one overt act, or
one witness to one overt act and another wit-
nesss to another overt act, of the same spe-
des of treetson. The reason of the law was,
that the legislature, in prosecutions for hieh
tceason (carried on, as they always are, by the
pyverament of the countiy) had witnessed
mstances in which ilidividuals were overborne
by the power and the influence of that govem-
inent ; it was, therefore, necessary that a jury
should have, in a case of so great maenitude
as ihis, the satisfaction arising firom the oon-
oirring testimony of two witnesses to some
one overt act, or one witness to one overt act
and another witness to another overt act, of
the same species of treason.

Before I state to you, gentlemen, what the
question is which ^ou have to consider, give
mc leave to state, in one word, what it is you
have not to consider. The question is not
whether there was or was not probable ground
for this prosecution. The question is, whether
the attorney-general ha$ tuhttantiaied the
charge of high trtoMm^ according to the itrict
requiiUcB of the lam. This statement of the

2uestion you will perceive the necessity of
eeping in vour minds, from some observar
tions I shall have occasion to make herea/Wr.
Before I enter upon the examination of the
evidence which has been given, I would l>eg
leave to remark on the improbable nature of
the- case attempted to be made out. on the
part of the crown. It is surely no immaterial
consideration, whether the charge which is
brought against the prisoner is attended with
probability or with improbability; beoause,
undoubtedly, evidence of a less weighty na^
ture will substantiate a probable charge than
will substantiate an imfwobable change.
Now, upon viewing the whole of this ease
together, I will venture to say, that, from
the bej;inning to the end, it b attended with
every improbability that ean attend any ac«
oount of any hmnan transactioni or any pre*
tended human transaction. Among ether
things, let it be considered, what motive M
these persons conld have who are afflnned in
the indictment to be conspirators. Iti former
assassination-ploti, whkh have become the
subjects of judkial inquiries, there was In a
Beighbourinft kingdom a competitor to the
tlirone, ready to assert his pretensions by
force of arwj^ and there weie tt ikii oounti^

numerous adherents to tke^threntd prince,
ready to seeond and to support his preUn-
sions; therefore, there was a very obvious
purpose to be attained b^ the persons who
were conspiring to assassmate the reianing
kin^ namely, to remove him, in or£r ta
place the exiled monarch upon the throne.—*
Happily for this countiy, tnat is no longer
the case. We have now no disputed throne^
his nujesty reigns by unquestionable right,
and reigns, too, m the hearts of fais subjects.

GenUeraen, there is another observaiioa
upon the improbability of the charge which
may not be unworthy your attention. — It is
said this assassination was to lutve been
efiected In the theatre at Covenl-gputden. Is
it at aJl conceivable that any persons eoulil
perpetrate a crime so horrid m that public
place without necessarily becoming the vie*
tims of their own guilt P Is it reasonable to
suppose, that any persons could be so mad aa
to imagine that tney couhl perpetrate that
crime and escape the punishment which they
so well deserved^ It is totally impossibM
they could entertain such a hope. YouwiU,
therefore, consider how atronr and powerful
a motive ought to be proved afwn persona
who are asserted to have engaged in a desi^
the execution of which must liave been at-
tendeil with the immediate loss of their owa
Mves.

I will now, genUemen, submit some obeer-
vations to you upon theevideiioe; and I feel
relieved from a great part of the duty that
would otherwise have been incumbent upon
me, by the observations which have been
already so forcibly made by- ny leameA
leader; and, therefoie, if in going over the
evidence for the crown I shomd not state it
to you with great particularity, that will lie
the reasouf and yeu will not, thetefore, ima-
gine that I have any wish to withdraw an^
part of it from your attention : indeed, if I bad
any such wish, I know it would be vain, be-
cause I am to be followed by the kartMd
attorney-general in reply« HieJeamed Judge,
tDO| who presides, will sum up aU theevidenoe
to you with tftie greatest accimcy.

In the first pl£ce, you have the evidence of
Dowding, Flint, and Bland, who sUite the
ooAversatiocs that patped between them and
a person of the name of Upton, of whom you
have heard so moeh. Palmer^ whom yoo Imve
seen, and seme traid petsett. Mot one of
these witnesses, however, has identified the
prisoner to be that thM person. Toa will
observe, farther, that, in all tliese eontferaa^
tions, Mr. Uptonis atatsd to be the person wlio
made the inquiries; Mr. Upton is the peMv
who is supposed te-havecamedea aoaaeliiing
like a negotiation with^eadi of 4iem$ tl»^gli|
in point of foot, aolfalng • was doae upon uny
of these inquires, no in8trumeBiwiaa«uule9
and, till you eooK- toUiewidamee of HiD» it
is not etated that ai^ythiiig'inukdeae m tattn

Mquenoe of thaaeinqirimi
tioni.

149]

fir Uig% Trtt^H.

A. D. 1796.

C130

Yoa oooM HmsH to tbe endance of Mr.
HaUy who 9Me$t that throe porsoos came to
hicD, Uptotiy Palmer, and a third person;
wliicli totrd peiaoii» hCy loo, has not identified
to be Mr. Ciossfield that he received instruo-
fioaa irom Uploa; and that that third persooi
wiioever he was» he thinka assisted Upton in
gmng the difectioDs.

Then yoa have the evidence of Mr. Palmer,
wbich is to conoeet Mr. Croesfield with the
whole of this transaction. Mr. Palmer states,
that himaelf, Upton and Mr. Crossfield, were
the persons who called at these brass^foun*
^eiBy and weie the persons who likewise
calkd upcm Mr. Hill.

You will lecollect, gentlemen, that Mr.
Palmer was a witness pmuced by the crown;
ho was a man, therefor^ whom the crown
teDdered lo yoa as deserving of your credit;
Ibr if ho was not deserving oif your credit, he
waa not a witness to be pmuced by them in
this eourt You will reooUect that the ideo«
U^ of Mr. Crossfield is proved only by Mr«
T^mumtf aod therefore I ihould supfiose that
the crown will not stale to you that Mr.
Palmer is not deserving of ypur credit, bo*
CMise the moment his credit is xleslroyed this
canae is out of court; for tkey have not
proved the identity of Mr« Croamekl by any
person but Palmer. Therefoie, I am por^
leet^ indifferent aa to PaloMr's credit ; I care
net wbetber he slando before yow as a man
enlitlod to the fullest credil, or as a man
lolally unworthy of your belief. I am per*
leolly indifiereol upon that suldect; because
if be is deserving or credit, then the whole of

eevidetiee fnust be toriken to be true. And
bna stsAed, that the caUiag upon Upton
waa accidental ; he has staled, that he called
fipon Upton for a watch of lus, which Upton
w«s mending ; that upon mentioning to Upton
which way Mr. Croesfield and he were going,
Upton eaki he was going the same way» and
woold accompany them ; that Upton was the
■aan who spoke to every person upon whom
Ibey called : ho has not the least oiemory of
aoy one |»art that either of them took in the
conversations eioept Upton; and, therefore,
if Palmer is a person of credit, then one of
those persons who is supposed to he a witness
to prove some one of the overt acts charged in
the indictment, is a witness who does not
peove any one of those overt acts.

You OBCollect how this is supported, on the
other hand, by UilJ, if it is to be called sup*
port Hill stales, tliat he re<ieived iustruc-
tsoBs fivro Upton; and he thinks that a third
persouy whom he did not know, assisted in

r'm some part of the directions. Is this to
called two witnesses to an overt act? —
Is this that concurring testimony of two wit-
nesses to an overt act which the law requires
beforo a priseoer can be provably attainted of
open deed P It certain^ is not* One witness
pfovea aomeihing like a foct, which Ihct the
crown attempt to c<4our by subsequent e^'i-
doKe, and the other ^witness fixes identity

but proves no facts; and if this overt act ia
not proved, I b^ to ask what overt act upon
this mdictraent is proved? Not one. Thta
is the only overt act to which the evidence
for the crown can be applied.

The first overt act charged in tbe indict-
ment is, that tlie prisoner, together with Lo
Maitre, Smithy and Hif^ins, the other persons
named in the indictment, conspired to pro-
cure and provide a certain instrumenU for the
purpose of discharging an arrow, and also a cer*
tain arrow to be loaded with poison, with intent
to discharge the said arrow so loaded with
poisooy bv means of the said instrument, at and
aranst the person of the king, and therelqr tn
kul him. Now, you cannot but have oh?
served,, that, although this is the main and
principal overt act^-although it is tliat which
first presents itself to the eye upon reading the
indicto^ent. yet tbe crown nave not affected to

S've a mp9 tittle of evidence in support of it
Mn the beginning lo the end of their case.

Gentlemen, you must have supposed, from
healing the iaifictment read, that you were to
have evidence of a oonspiraey of the prisoner
with those other persons to proeuro and to
provide this instrument; ana yet you have
beard no more of those persons upon the evi«
dence for the crown than if they had never
existed from the bcginmng of time to the pre-
sent moment. The first overt act, thevefore^
is not even attenf ted to be proved by the
crown.

The second is the overt act upon wluch I
have alreaii^ observed^ and to which alone
the evidence for the crown applies; thatia
tbe empiwing Hill to prepare two pieces of
vmod, to be used as modela for the making
certain parts of tbe instrument before men-
tioned, and delhforing to Hill drawings, as inr«
atnictions for making such models.

The third overt act charges the prisoner^
together with the other three, with deliberatine
on the killing of the king, by the means and
iastrament aforesaid, and how and where it
might most efiectually be accomplished. Of
thai, toOf vou have not heard one s'mgle sy lla«
bleinevKience.

The fourth is, employing Upton to assist in
making the instrument ; and for that pur*
pose delivering to him a paper with drawiDgs^
as instructions for makinc the instrument,
and also two pieces of wooo as models for the
instrument

Gentlemen, as you have not seen Mr. Upton
-*«-fiom what cause it is not now my business to
inquire— but as, in point of fact, you have not
seen Mr. Upton, you have had no evidence
given, or aflected to be given, cither of the
prisoner at the bar or of the other persons
who stand charged with him in the indict-
ment having employed Upton for that pur-
pose, or having delivered to him any drawmgs
for that purpose.

There remains, then, only another overt
act, which is, delivering to Upton a metal
\Mkm,tQ be used hy him m the xnaking of the

161]

S6 GEORGE IH.

Trial of Robert Thomas CrotsfiM

[159

iQAtrument, and as a part of the instniment.

Now, gentlemen, what proof have you of
that overt act ? All the proof you have is,
that, in the possession of Upton, a metal
tube, which has been produced, was found.
Unquestionably the metal tube was in the
possession of Upton. But after the evidence
you have heard respecting Upton — after the
evidence, too, which you nave not heard re-
fBpecting Upton, I mean, because you have not
seen or heard Mr. Upton himself— is it to be
inferred, that, because a metal tube was in his
possession, that, therefore, the prisoner de-
livered that metal tube to him to be employed
for that purpose ? I am sure a presumption
80 violent, fio totally unsup{)orted by all the
evidence, is not a presumption that can be
seriously and gravely stated to you on the
part of the crown.

There is another set of overt acts, which
differs from this only in the description of the
instrument; I shall not detain you, therefore,
with any observations upon them.

I believe it is uoneoessary for me to make
more than one or two observations farther
upon that which is the original evidence in
support of this indictment You must have
anticipated me in observing, that it was not so
very remarkable that Mr. Upton should be

foing to a brass-founder's, or tliat he should
e $oing to a turner's, for the purpose of or-
denng any instrument to be constructed
which was not in his ordinary business as a
watch-maker, because it has been proved that
he was, likewise, an ingenious mechanic in
other branches ; that he had in his shop an
electrical machine of a curious construction,
of his own invention, that he was extremely
proud of it, and you observe when he was
asked by Hill the purpose for which the
models were wanted by him, he said they
were for the purpose of an electrical ap-
paratus.

Leaving then, gentlemen, all that evidence
which merely states certain circumstances
respecting Mr. Crossfield calling with Upton
upon Hill, and those cirumstances proved, as
1 submit, only by one witness (because not
one of the other witnesses, excepting Palmer,
speaks to the identity; of Mr. Crossfield), un-
less there was something more in the case, it
would unquestionably be impossible for you
to conceive by what means that evidence
could be applied to the support of the indict-
ment upon which you have to decide.

But the crown state that they can give cor-
roboraiive evidence — evidence of conversa-
tions or of confessions of Mr. Crossfield which
cotppletely prove the traitorous purpose with
which he did those acts. Now, evidence
which is corroborative, or in other words evi-
dence which is auxiliary, can only weigh in
your minds so much as to produce a convic-
tion, when there has been previously some
one overt act established according to the re-
quisites of the act of parliament by two wit-
siesses; or two overt acts, one proved by one

witness, and another proved by another. The
superstructure cannot be raised until the foun-
dation for it is laid.

Gentlemen, of all evidence that is produced
in a court of justice, evidence of confessions,
of conversations, of words, is the most loose
and the most suspicious. I am sure the ob-
servations which my {learned friend made ta
vou upon that subject, and the very respecta-
dIc authorities which he cited cannot tail to
have made the strongest impression upon
vour mind. In addition to them, I will quote
but one authority, and that is Mr. Justke
Blackstoue, who says, *f Words may be spoken
in heat without any intention, or be mistaken,'
perverted or misremembered by the hearers.
Their meaning depends always upon thdr
eonn^ion with other words and things. They
may signify differentljr even according to the
tone oi voice with which the^r are delivered ;
and sometimes silence itself is more expres-^
sive than any discourse." I will not ada one
word of my own to this admirable obserta-
tion of that learned, that judicious, and that
elegant writer upon the English law.

Gentlemen, you have the testimony of per*
sons who were on board the prison-ships with
Mr. Crossfield, who come to you to state,
that be made certain declarations upon the
subject-matter of the crime with which he
now stands charged. Here, too, the case is
attended with some of the strongest improba^
bilities that can exist, and with some circum-
stances extremely hostile to that case, which
is attempted to be made out by the witnenes
on the part of the crown.

The first witness that vou heard was Le
Bretton, who stated himself to be boat steefS^
roan, which, as I understand, is a situation of
very inferior condition on board a ship, cer-
tainly such a man is not a suitable companion
for the captain and the officers, or the sur-
geon. Le Bretton has stated to you the
words which Mr, Crossfield is supposed to
hi^ve uttered, and which are conceived to
prove the criminal purpose with which he
did the acts that have been before alluded to.
Le Bretton says, I have heard him say be
was one of those that invented the air-gun to
assassinate, which he called aaigiMtie — to
shoot his majesty. I asked him, what it was
like ; he told me the arrow was to go throueh
a kind of a tube by the force of inflammame
air, he described the arrow to be like to one
of our hai^ons.

Now I should have supposed when the
next witness Dennis was called, that he was
to have proved the same declaration as Le
Bretton, and most undoubtedly it was con-
ceivedhe would prove the same. Dennis was
more Le Bretton's associate than any oUier
porson. He was mate of the ship in wbkh
Ije Bretton was a sailor, and consequently he
and Le Bretton must more finequentfy have as-
sociated, and were more likely than any other^
to be in company together with Mr. Cross-
field.

153]

f6r High Treaion.

A. D. 1796.

[154

Heroy gendemen, jon hsre m bctwhidi
markr the danger of gii^og so much credit as
is sought to be given to this testimony, be-
came you must see that not two of those wit-
nesses speak to the same declaration ; Dennis
tells you he heard Mr. Crossfield say, that his
majesty was to be assassinated at the play-
house VY a dart blown through a tube, and
that he knew how the dart was. copstnicted ;
it was something of the shape of a hairpoon.

Then we come to Mr. Winter, and real^ly
after the ver^ acute cross^xamination of my
friend last night, and after the observations
whkh he made upon his evidence this morn-
ing, I am almost ashamed of re- calling your
attention to his testimony, eicept to remark
that this, too, eonaptres, as every thing does
copspire, to prove the extreme danger of ad-
mitting this 86rt of evidence as a proof of
guilt. What does Mr. Winter say f He says
that Mr. Crossfield told him, he actually had
shot at his majesty, but unluckily missed
him; he said this was between the Palace
and Buckingham-house; that this was Cross-
fieki*sdaily subject of discourse for five months,
and tliat he once dipped his finger into some
grog and narked upon the table how the
arrows* were made. Then there are some
other declarations respecting what he hoped
would happen in future.

Lastly comes Mr. Penny, and he states,
that Mr. Crossfield sakl he was one of the ring-
leaders of the three that attempted to blow
the dart^ at his nuyesty in Covent-garden
theatre — stating the attempt to have been
actually made, of which you nave had no proof,
and which there is no pretence to say ever
had been made — ^and that if he arrived in
England he would do the same again.

Although it does not come exactlv in its
place, I must remark the extreme absurdity
of supposing that a person who is imagined
to have couKssed to this witness that he had
actually committed the crime of high treason,
should my that if he ever came to England
^ain, he would do— what ? Not that he would
commit any other species of high treasout*-
not even that he would commit the same
species of high treason in any other way —
but Uiat he would commit high treason again
in the particular way in which he is supposed
to have committed high treason before, when
all the parties were in custody, when the
whole scheme was known to the public, and
which, therefore, was the last scneme that
ever would have been thoueht of by anv man
in his senses, even if he had entertained those
detestable designs.

But, gentlemen, some observations arise
upon the manner in which these witnesses
have given their evidence, and upon the sort
of intimacy which they must have had with
Mr. Crossfield. Le Bretton, I am sure, must
have impressed you by the manner in which

field and he did not associate on board the
prison-ship; that he was in one mess, and
Mr. Crossfield in another, as must certainly
have been the fact, considering the disparity
of their conditioDs. He owns that he dis*
Mked Mr. Crossfield, and it is extremely hit
to suppose that that dislike was mutual.
Yet it is to be imagined that of all the per-
sons in that prison-ship, Le Bretton, a roan
of inferior condition, disliking him and dis-
liked by him, was the man whom he should
"select as his confidant, with whom he should
entrust his life, to whom he should actually
confess, that he had been guilty of high trea*
son in attempting to kill the king !

Then you come to Dennis; he was the
mate of the ship, and he did associate ^th
Mr. Crossfield, because he was in the same
mess ; but when I asked him as to his inti-i
macy with Mr. Crossfield, he said he never to
his knowledge exchanged fifty words with
him all the time he was in France, and not
many more Uian fifty before he arrived there.
He too appears not to have been very fii-
vourably disposed towards Mr. Cjrossfield, and
I think it may be reasonably inferred that
Mr. Crossfield was not in habits of the greatest
degree of sociability and intimacy with htm.
Yet it is supposed that Mr. Crossfield has
such a strange taste for confidants, that he
first of all selects a common sailor with whom
he did not associate, and whom he did not
like ; and next a mate whom he disliked so
much that, although Mr. Crossfield is con-
fessedly a man of Tevitf, of rattle, and ex-
tremely talkative, he did not exchange fiAy
words with him in a six months captivity,
during which they messed together every day.

Now I appeal to ^ou, gentlemen, whether
it is possible to conceive of any evidence more
improbable than that which has been given
bv Le Bretton and Dennis, who speak to de«
clarations which could have been inspired
onlv by the greatest intimacy and confidence;
and which by their evidence would appear to
have existed, where there was every thing the
most remote either from intimacy or con*
fidence.

Mr. Crossfield was afterwards removed on
board another ship, and there he finds Mr.
Winter. Mr. Winter, you perceive, is a man
rather stricken in years, and I think even
upon his own evidence in chief, he most have
appeared to you to be a man of a^ weak an
understanding as ever made his appearance
in a court of justice. What does he state?
He states that Mr. Crossfield said, that he
actually had committed the crime, — not that
he had conspired to commit it, — not that he
was concerned with others in anV plot to
commit the crime,^^but that he had actually
committed an overt act of high treason in
shooting at the king. That is not either of
the overt acts charged upon this indictment:

he gave his evi<knoe, with an idea of his not Th&crown did not think proper to state that
being very favourable to Mr. Crossfield. Le ' as an overt act, because unquestionably it
Bretlon states^ that ia point of fact, Mr. Cross- never did exist.

105] 86 GEORQB QI.

BtH wfaat ahaU Wf any to Wtntin 'when h
miean upon his cfota-mnioalion, that from
his siHtuess and credulitgr* he was the bulL
Iha ridicule of every person io the ship, and
that they were perpetually telling foolish
stories to hiro in reply to his vtry foolish
Ivories to tbemP A more striking instanee
of ^e complete credidily of the human mind,
of a mind which must be as near dotage as it
k pqesible fer any mind Io be (if it is not
absolutely in a state of dotage), is the story
be told last night respecting the hare, which,
tie 8ays» jumped into bis arms, which hare he
thfew imp a kennel of houndsi and there that
hare remained, like Daniel in the lion's den,

eun for sQvecel hours. le it possible to
m to aii^ thing ths^ « men says, whose
foiod eau be so extremeW Yeak as to alk>w
of bis telling tbnit as a tac^ which |io man
living eoiM believe if it were stated by a
thousand witnesses— that a hare coukl be
thrown ii^o a kenoel of hounds, and that the
dcq^ aAer permitting it to remain among
ihem unhurt for many houiSi should then
lake into their heads to chace it* Winter was
IMked %«ieftion ^hicb nalMi94ly aeoae from
tbal^Wbetber be hsd not lepieMnted this
hare to be the devil i^ the shape of aharef
No, he is postti^e he nei^er said that. I think
the iMTobabtlitv of the case would have been,
even if webadbed AQ^videpceto proiw tbe&c^
Ihet whevea man «iis so weak a^ to believe
It iKHwiUsi iovahiMe tor^P^io unhurt ioa
l^epfiet of dQg!ifi>f HTVoml hours, he would be
BMpcfftitipus enough ^ euppp^ the hare was
fomMhteg supefpati||a(. Hut it does not
post upou that wbksh i^ tbf probability of the
^Ase; heeause we have it. from the evkknos
9f captain €olUn8, tha^ he did state this hare
|e be the devU in the shape of a liare, and
Iherefese what Winter states oi hie net Immt*
iegsaid so, iaoompletefyand absolute^ ftlsa
TheOy gjBOllemen, we come to the evidence
9f Penny, and hb evidence of declaration
vanes, as 1 have before observed, from all the
declamtions affocted to be proved by the other
witne^ies* He states the act toO' to have been
really done, which this indictment oharaes
Mr.Cressfifldfwith having qonspired to do;
he says Mr. Ciosafield told him, he was one
of the nngleaderfrof the threetluit attempted
to. blow a dart at his mi^esty at Covent-gar*
4en, and he would do the like again if he
bad an opportunity.

Sometnmg is to be gathered, as I before
observed, from the demeanor of witnesses.
You may collect something of the truth of
their evidence from the circumstances of their
appearing to come well or ill disposed to the
person against whom they speak. And I
think I may appeal to you respecting the de^
meaner of Penny, that he dia not come with
any vety fiivourable or even with an impartial
disposition towards Mr. Crossfield. Afler I
baa cross-examined him, and not at any great
lenath, he brought out with gre^ eagerness,
" nt said all this and fnorc^-^ibr was asked

qfB$ier$ Tkama§ CroffiM [IA6

directly what this eiore waa. It did not ap-
pear to be coming very quickly, and therefore
I sat down to wait for it After seme pause,
bis lordship asked what it was? No answee
—Another pause-^his lordship asked him, if
he heard his questkm**-^ Yes'^-^but still no
answer. Again and again was his lordship
obliged to remind him that he was waiting
for an answei^-«nd then what was this morel
Nothing additional could he venture to stato
-*4Nit he then says, your lordship has got
this down, and tht^ down, and the other, re^
peating eveiy thing he had said before, in the
veiy same woids 1m bed before used, and in
the same order, but not pretending thai
be had eny thing new to state, though he
had before said & had something more to
stato % and the whole of bis behaviooc
created a suspicion, that be was endeavouring
to invent rnnething to eatrioale himself hom
the diffictt^ in which his seal had involved
him.

Gentlemen, I faanfeehservedupon the vari*
ances in the aoxmnts given by these wit-
nesses of the dedantioos of Mr. Crosslield $
and that natorally inlredocea the observation
which I am now to submit io you, that inas*
much as I have before, I thinks demoo8tiate(L
that you have not had any overt, act psoved
by two witnesses, as the stetute fequiies-<-
so, on the other hand, you have not any con-
fession of an overt aa proved by two wit^
oesses; iMOHise Le Beetten is the only mam
who has stated to you, thai Mr. Ciossfiekl
eonlessed to him he was one of those that in*
vented the m-pia to shoot his msyeaty.
Therefore to fortify that which, I think, is
not established siiSciently to be fortified, you
have merely the sifeiglis evidence of Le
Bretton, as to the confeseioas ef Ms. Cross-
field. Bui this, you wiU recoHect^ t» aol#
eoofessioa of any itae of the overt acte
proved, or attempted to be proved. You have
no overt act proved of a cenapim^ for the
purpose of hiUtog his miyestv. There baa
net been a single tittle of evimtnce pfodneed
by the crown to establish that charge of con-
spiracy, and vet every one of the supposed
confessions of Mr. GrossfieM, relatiss to soma
supposed conspiracy, of which the crown hai
not been able to produce a single tittis of
evidence. Therefoee ydo wili consider how
remote all these converaayens of ^r. Crosa^
field are from proving, Uiaiho confossed to
these witnesses t^at he was guilty of any one
of the overt oets which is charged upoo-thia
record, I mean of any one of these otert
acts upon which the crown have offamd-uy
evidence to youreoasider^lion.

Gentlemen, this b«og the-evidenee on the
part of the crown, the atuimey«geiiefal soid^
that,he thought it vmdd behove the prieooer to
^ve some account of the instrumeal in qne^
tion, and of the design wiith whiob it waa
made, and this he considered to be a necessary
part of our defence.

Gentlen^eui the crowaia t^mabo euttle

157]

Jijf High Trmum.

A.D. 17M.

tisi

c«s« by tai o«m 8lr«iiglh,fiot1by th* wHJcneiA
•fa frtMtter. A pdeoncr lias a right to
stand upoB the deieoshrey and to say, I do
noi eooie here lo ytwn my iimocencey it is for
ycm lo iwoTc my guih— and e^ideoce to prove
that mmi musi be prsduced before he tan be
eaUea upon to niake any defence at all. But
even when a prisoner is called upon to give
seme evidence in Ills defence, the nature of
cfcat eviilence must depend upon the nature
•f the case which is attempted to be made
•ni againsi him, and he is tiot to be called
upon to give evidence^ which in the nature of
Ihkies it ts not in hie power to give.

A3outting the whole of the evidence that
haa been etven on the part of the crown to be
Mie, and oniwing f^om it every inference that
the ciown wouidwish to draw, the knowledse
eif the esLiBtcnce df these models is oniy
pfoved to have been in the prisoner, In Pa^
in UpHmi and in Hill. Hill you have

icen^ Palmer you have seen, Upton you have
noi seen — and, therelbfe, I shonM be glad to
know what wlniess I am to produce upon the
sii^oct--^m i to produce Mr. Unton? The
crwrn stoto that he is dead, ana, therefore,
tfiey cannot csJl upon us to produce him* I
hem to aak^ then« hew BIr. Crussfield is to be
ea&d npM to giiw may account of the natme
of tfakiMtrumenty when it is not pretended
that tberr is any. e«her llmg witness who
ever snw it*

But raealleet^ gemleinett, what it is that
Mr. Ctossfield is supposed to bate seen. It
ia nnt alfetied tohe said heaver saw any perl
o# the tnstrtiment For you will recellect,
that in the conversation at HiH's, at which
Palmer states MK Gvessfield to be present,
UpMr WAS giving instructions for mafcingthe
flMdlit, Fahttec never saw thai model, andHIll
is the only witness produced who ever saw it,
•aeepling aOorwirds in the possession of
l/pton^ when Mr. Wiu<d sawit.

With mspeci to the met*! tube, that which
iaibfinitoly the most ibrmidsMe part of the
untntment, thsft- too whteh might perhups
fwndity; expkm< the meanings of all the res^
that tsiihout whifth« alt the rest is unlntelliw
gible(ftirIdeiyyoti'to oOfHect ftemthe^r^st
any a«ippositlo» thiit angr person, imlest he
wiere sliulAtl in* that line, couidconcUido that
ii wttfht an ii^igun)^ that thM mettFltibe* is
not proved tohair4 hoenih thepossesitonrof
any jperiott hurl^ionv Mir. Crossfield^ never
saw it» neeetf heetfd^ HtUI afterwnrd^; ttud^
tiMrelhm, what eoidetteeeon he give of its
pttifiMe> and* ini«tit^ l^oit' wIlL not ibtget^
gemUMen^ thai I am sUtibg^tiklflFUypotheH-
oaliyi f^^ing> theeas»i(»r' the orowir all the
wvta|l»sAi€h can be^mffedted'to be giVen lolt
by^MMttOivesiand nMOilOfrtngi bMUisekis
n^^koiHiii^tiktil^.eMakmhiA the^i^ast
iMMMUfi^n^w the Km&bti* modol' m»f6t
IM {ttrpnM»nf^to«it4an> 6t ^v he'hsd Mry
fAmj^ to^h' wHh'Oid^miig % Htfthet than itos^
Mty'^l¥injs Uptotf a mUe iMSimnce inot^

Is was in the power of the croWn, if the
fiict had existed to have proved that Mr,
Crossfield knew something«iore of the instru-
ment, because they have called Mrs. Upton,
who stales that she had seen Mr. Crossfield
at her husband's house; but she does not
venture to stato that when Mr. Crossfield was
at the house, he saw mther the drawing, the
models, or the brass tube ; and you will rend-
lect (for it is a thing never to m forgotten in
the coarse of this cause) that that brass tube
is only spoken to, as having been in the pos*
session m Upton, and that there is not one
single tittle of evidence that any one person,
excepting those who have been produced to
you, ever saw it» and these persons on^ saw
It in the possession of Upton. Pahaer never
saw it. Hill never saw it, no person ever did
see it, eicept Pusey and Steers, and afterwarda
Mr. Ward, when Upton dlsekeed this sup-
posed alot to him.

Witn respect to the evidence we hate pnn
dneed, you will observe, that we have pro^
duced evidence not immediately respecting
Mt. Ctnssfteld personally, but whicAi wi& In
some measure account to you for the charge
which Upton broug^ agunsi Le Maitre^
Smith, and Hlggins, who were the perscme
firstanprehendM. Wehave^ptovedmostindis-
putobly, that those i>erson» were porseiog aM
enquiry against him in the Corresponding 8o«
ciety, for a cfauge of amostatrociotts naturer
that they were pursuing it vidth soMie degree
of violence, ana that he was- resisting it with
every possible degree of violence and rancour.
We b«v8 likewise proved to you declai»i«
tions, that but for their exposmg Mm hw
never would have made that charge agamst
them.

Now let m look at this indictment; whaf
does this indictment import to be? achatg^af
upon the prisoner and 8mlfli» Higgins, and
Le Maitre^ of a consniraorto kill we king^
and Upton is supposed to be the instrument.
The attomejr-gMieral stated in his openings
that Upton, irhe had come into ooun must
have come here to state himself an ac-
complice inthecrkne of hf^h treason, and
that he iras one of the pitncipal eonspi-'
rators.

Do I not then estsUish Mi} farthertiie es^
treme improbability of this charge as it stands
upon the indKtment, ^t Upton should- have
been supposed to have been in actual conspi*'
lUcy. with men, who at that vei^ time were
punuing all enquhy ag^nst him in the Cor-
respondmg Society, were endesvonring to
pMmtti htt expukion from that society on
aocouttt'of the mfiuny of his chii'Setor, and*
it^pOtiCIng whom he- made detlsratione whieh
manifest MS ehmity and ranoour? Is' it to
be supposed^ that persons enter into consfnm^^
de« for crimes imihthose wtA whom they ^ste
on terms of'ho«8itff TheMppositionisniOBli
^d end-ei^trtv^Bgfenti

You will also reoolteet the evidteoe of Mr.
FlteOf^ ft» to the degree of acquaincuice

159]

96 GJBOHGS HI. Trial o/RoUri Thonm.CroiffiM

C1§0

Khich Mr. Cro8sfid(i had with UptOD, that
the acquaintance was of very short duration,
that it commenced with meeting in the Cor-
responding Society, and that the call upon
the occasion, which is the subject of the evi-
dence, was purely accidental. Why, gentle-
men, good men do not associate for good pur-
poses without knowing something of each
other, without having some general knowledge
of the character which each of them bears.
Bad men do not couspire to commit crimes
without that degree of mtimacy, friendship^nd
confidence which shall enable each to believe
that when he trusts his character or his life
in the power of the other, he trusts it in the
power of a man who will not betray him. A
man surely will not offer to engage with ano-
ther in a conspiracy, to commit the greatest
and most atrocious crime that can possibly be
<;ommitted, without a considerable degree of
knowledge of him, and confidence in him:
because lor aueht he knows> the moment
after he has disdosed his puroose to him, that
man would go, as it was his auty, and inform
the secretary of state of the transaction, and
in aa hour's time, be might find himself a
prisoner in the Tower for high treason. Here
IS then another of the strong improbabilities
with. which the whole of the case of the
crown is encompassed. . It is supposed that
)dr. Crossfield entered into a traitorous con-
spiracy with Upton, upon a short acquaint-
ance, upon litUe knowledge, and therefore
when he was not in a situation to bestow upon
him that confidence which was absolutely ne-
cessary to the guilty transaction imputed to
him by this incuctment

But it is supposed that Mr, Crossfield must
be aguilty man, because ai\er Le Maitre. Smith
and lliffgins were apprehended, he left Lon-
don witb^Mr. Palmer, and went to Bristol.
If Mr. Crossfield was one of the persons
charged in this conspiracy by Upton, why
was he not apprehenaed at the time Smith,
Hij^gins, and Le Maitre were apprehended ?
It IS not affected to be said, that Mr. Cross-
field had left London, till auer not only Upton
was apprehended and had given his informal
tjon, but Smith, Higgins, and Le Maitre
were apprehended. You will observe that
the information was nven by Upton to Mr.
Ward, on the 13th of September. You will
observe, too (referring to another transac-
tion) that there was a very violent quarrel
between him and Le Maitre and Uiggins, on
the 4th, only eight days preceding. On the
16th of that month Mr. Ward hail aU inter-
view with Mr. Pitt, and informed him fully
of all the charge as it had been made by
Upton: eleven di^s more passed and then
Upton was apprehended. He made a full
disclosure of this supposed conspiracy ; and
on the night of the 37 th, Le Mahre and Hig-
gins were apprehended ; on the 38th, SmiUi
was apprehended, and they were au taken
before the privy council.
Now, 1 04^ to ask, when, for the first time,

, was it Uiat Mr. Crossfield was supposed to
have had a share in this conspiracy r If h%
was supposed to have had a share in the con-*
spiracY at this time, most unquestionably Mr.
Crpssfield would have been apprehended when
the others were apprehended. He was not
theu apprehended, although his residence was
perfectly well known; but it was not till
afterwards^ and long lon^ afterwards that
Mr. Crossfield was the subject of any charge.
If Mr. Crossfield had then been the subject
of any charge, and if the crown could not
readily have found him, there is an expedient
to which they always do resort, and afterwards
did resort, namely, a proclaination, with a
reward for his apprehension. The proclama-
tion offering a reward of two hundred pounds
for the apprehension of Mr. Crossfield, I have
no doubt, Mr. Attorney General will admit
was not issued till the 87thof Februanr, 1795*
Mr»AU&rney Generals — I admit that UiQ

{proclamation was not issued earlier than my
earned friend has stated.

Mr. Gunt^.— It is candidly admitted byt
the attorney-general, that the proclamation
offering two hundred pounds reward for tho
apprehension of Mr. Crossfield, was never
issued till the 37th of February, 1796, near
five months after the charge was brought
aeainst the others and they were apprehend*
ea ;- therefore, I ask again, when was it that
he was for the first time charged with this
conspiracy ? That he was not chareed with
it at the time the others were is plain, be-
cause he would have been apprehended with
them; that he was not charged with it till
long afUrwards is plain, because it was not till
long afler that the crown resorted to— -thai
which is their never failing expedient — pub-
lishing a proclamation, offering a feward for
hb apprehension.

Palmer has proved that Mr. Crosafield'»
journey to Bristol, was not then for the first
time proposed, that he had for some months
had an intention of going to Bristol, for the
purpose of trying experiments upon the waters^
and seeing whether it was an eligible situfr-
tion to settle in. But putting it for a moment
upon the supposition that Mr. Crossfield had
retired to Bristol, upon the account of this
charge, I do protest aflunst its beineconsi*
dered as evidence of gunt that a man has not
strength of nerves to meet a charge of high
treason, more especially if you. recur to tm
time when this transaction took place^

My learned friend has stated tnat just.pie*
vious to this, there had been two convictions
for high treason in Scotland, that a special
commission bad issued for the trial of persons
then in the Tower, accused of high treason in
England. There wasat.that timeaprosecik-
tion coming forward for high treason^ I will
venture to say, the most tremendous^ in the
history of this country; a prosecution nel
merely supported by the usual power, wealthy
' and influence of tne crown, but in wnich the
whole legisUtwe had coBWiMd ta pcoeecwlt;

r

tei]

/or High Treatan,

A. D. 1796.

{lea

^h«re, as i^as inost foroibly said by one* of
the ^reat advocates for the prisoners, the two
Houses of parliament had made up the brief?
of the counsel for the crown; where, above
iJ\, there was a prejudice, upon the subject so
deeply rooted, and so widely spread, that it
^a^ scarcely possible to find a man wlio was
not tainted and corrupted with it. I have
too the evidence of that which is notorious to
M mankind, that some of the persons accused
of ^at treason, whom I have a right to call
iiitx)cent persons, did not surrencter to take
their trials upon that indictment. One of
the gentlennen charged who was at large, Mr.
HolcrofL did surrender immediately. War-
die, Ho(&son, and Moore, never did siurender
to take their trials, and the prosecution after-
trards ceased without their eoming into court.
Therefore it is not to be presumed that a
ittan*^ retiring from a charge of high treason,
tTtk)t putting himself forward to meet it at
ao critic^ a time as that when this transac-
tkm took place, furnishes conchisive evidence
of a consciousness of ^ilt in his mind. This
t say Tipon the supposition of your not giving
full credit to Palmer. But, gentlemen, Mr.
Crossfield is stated to have returned from
firi&tol, in the month of December, and here
we have accounted for him completely, by
the ^dence of Mrs. Smith, because we nave
shown that be lodged at her house, and did
not leave her lodging to go on board the
Pomona, till the latter end of January. Then
he cofUfs on board the Pomona, and you have
the evidence of those persons, who had been
called on the part of the crown, to prove his
declarations.

Genderoen, there is one observation I
omitted to make, and it is scarcely necessary
for me to recur to it, because it was forcibly
Impressed upon you by my learned friend, on
Che evidence of a/act m contradiction to some
of those declaratioru the witnesses have
ftp<^en to.

Mr. Crossfield is supposed to have said,
that he was rejoiced at going on board a
"Fieiteh ship, for he would rather go to France,
than return to England. And vet he was
s man so strangely formed as to be averse to
liappmess when it %aB in his power to pro-
core it, for he most readily entered into a con-
spiracy to rise upon the French, to seize upon
their Bhipvand return to England. Gentle-
men, evidence of a fact like that, where he

risking his own life in a very unemial
jcontestyfor the purpose of rescuing the snip,
is enough to set at nought a thousand such
deebrations as those which have been spoken
to of his jov at escaping from England, and a
prospect of getting into France.

Then, gentlemen, we have called to you
persons 'amo were confined on board the pri-
aoQ ship with Mr. Crossfield. And here I
must not fail to observe on the deficiency of

* Mr. Ermine: see the trial of John Home
Tooke, OTrt?,- VoL 96, p. «W.
VOL, XXVL

the case proved on the part of the crown.
Th6 witnesses who have been called have
stated the names of a number of persons,
who were in the daily and hourly babi^ of as-
sociating with Mr. Crossfield — ^they have
stated, that they save those names to tlie
privy council, or atleast to some of the agents
of the crown ; and, therefore, the crown had
it in their power to have procured the attend-
ance of them all, because they all of them
came home in the cartel with Mr. Crossfield.
You will recollect that Mr. Crossfield and
those persons came over in the cartel the
latter end of August^ or the beginning of
September, and this indictment never waa
preferred till the month of January. Mr.
Crossfield was all that time a close prisoner
in the Tower, having no intercourse with his
friends, and consequently very little, or in*
deed, not at all able to make any preparatiofl
fbr his defence. It was in the power of the
crown to have given you the satiafkctmi «f
hearing the testimony of all these peisoitt^
with whom he was in habits of real intimacy
and friendship, to whom, therefore, if he had
made any such declarations as these, he
would have been most likely to have made
them.

Upon this nart of the case we have produc-
ed some evidence, but here, too, we could
only give you such evidence as it was in our
power to produce; and surely we have a
right to infer, that if all the persons had
been called who were constantly in Mr. Cross-
field's company on board the prison-ships,
they would not have confirmed the evidence
which has been given on the part of the '
crown, otherwise you would undoubtedly have
heard them.

Above all, the most material witness is
captain Clarke, who enga^ Mr. Crossfield
as his surgeon — captain Clarke, with whom
he constantly lived—- captain Clarke, who,
you will not forget, haa some conversation
with Le Bretton upon this subject ; for Le
Bretton stated that ne had some conversation
with him, that he had informed the crown of
captain Clarke, that captain Clarke had un*
dereone some sort of examination, and that
he had seen him at the office of Mr. White,
the solicitor for the Treasury. Why is not '
captain Clarke brought here ? It is said he
left this country about Christmas last. The
crown knew the case which they had to prove
against Mr. CrossfiekL and undoubtedly it
was in their power to nave detained captain
Clarke in this country to have given his evi-
dence, if his evidence would have tended hi
the least to support this prosecution.

Gentlemen, we have aone all that is in our
power to do; we have, with great anxiety
and with great diligence, sought those wit-
nesses who were in the company of -Mr.
Crossfield at this time ; and we have brought
to you, first, Mr. Cleverton, who was talcen in
another ship a few days after the capture of
the Pomona; and* he has slated toyou, thift

M

16SI

^ OFORGE III.

Trial qf Robert Thma9 Crossfieid

[J64

ot was in the habit of aaaociatiog with Mr.
€ro8ftfield Gonstantlv^that he messed at the
same table with him— and that he never
heud him make any declaration of disaffec-
tion to the Icing, or any confession of ever
having engageain anv treasonable conspiracy.
If Mr. Cros&eld had been in the habit of
doing. this f which it b the object of the wit-
nesses on tne part of the crown to prove), it
it utterly impossible but Mr. Cleverton must
have heard it. If Mr. Crossfieid could make
confidants of persons with whom he associat-
ed but little, and with whom he was not
upon any friendly terms, surely he would not
have been more reserved to those persons with
whom he associated much, and with whom he
was upon friendly terms.

Mr. Cleverton is asked whether he heard
Mr. Crossfieid sing a republican song, —
'' Yea, he heard him sins a republican song ."
the sons is produced, and it is read to jrou.
In the first place, the singing a song (which,
b^-the-by, Mr. Cleverton says he never heard
hun sing more than once or twice) I take to
be no sort of adoption of the principles which
the song contains, even if the man who sings
itissowr; Jbut you will not forget that, in
order to drown the sorrows of their captivity,
they all indulged themselves pretty freely in
the use of grog, and Mr. Crossfieid especially,
for he is stated to have been at that time m
the habit of constant intoiicatiuu, which must
weaken, if not completely destrov, the effect
of all the declarations that have been spoken
to on the part of the crown. But how aoes it
destroy aU the effect which is sought to be
given to singing a song — singing a song, too,
afier supper, by a person in the habit of in-
toxication, just at the verv time when that in-
toxication must necessarily have existed? But
if Mr. Crossfieid was so incautious as to make
declarations of this sort to Dennis and Le
Bretton, and so incautious as to sins a song
of this description, before Mr. Cleverton,
would he have been more cautious upon the
subject of these declarations in the presence
of Mr. Cleverton? Would not Mr. Cleverton,
or the other persons with whom he wras in
the habit of associating, be the persons to
whom he would have made this sort of decla-
rations?—and would not Mr. Cleverton,
therefore, have proved that he heard them ?

Another circumstance spoken to by Mr.
Cleverton was this, that any of the prisoners
upon slkht illness, and almost upon the pre-
tence ofan illness, might have gone to LAa-
demeau hospital ; that several persons went
upon, slight illness there, shortly before the
srangof the cartel, and in conseouence of
that they did not sail in the cartel for England.
Therefore, if the crown wished to establish
(that which I think has been before disprov-
ed), that Mr. Crossfieid had an anxious wish
so avoid England, and to reside in France,
surelrthis is weighty evidence to prove that
Mr Crossfieid might have avoided returning
to England, and that he might have remained
in France If he had chosen tu remain there. J

Then, gentlocnen, you have the evidence
of captain Collins, who was on board the same
^lip with Winter; and he states, that he in-
vited Mr. Crossfieid on board bis ship for the
purpose of his medical skill, to be applied to
the prisoners who were sick ; that that me-
dical skill was applied constantly, and with
great effect : and that by means of his skill
and humanity the lives of fifty or sixty of the
English prisoners were savedf. He has also
stated (that which is most material for your
consideration, as respecting Winter) that
Winter was a silly old man, telline foolish
stories, and among others, telling Uiat story
of the hare, upon which I have before oli-
served ; and that they used to tell foolish
stories, too, for the purpose of making a joke
of him. lie says, Winter was their common
lauehing- stock; and I am sure it isimpos-
sib& for your minds to have resisted the im-
pression, that Winter was th6 constant butt
of their ridicule, and that in truth it was
scarcely possible that any of them could have
said a serious word to him.

Captain Collins likewise proves another
circumstance, that there was an offer — ^and an
advantageous offer — made to Mr. Crossfieid,
if he would remain in France, namely, that
he should have the superintendance of the
hospital at Landerneau; yet such was Mr.
Crossfield^s reluctance to staying in France,
and desire to return to England, that he re-
fused that advantase9us offer ; and the reason
he assigned was, that he wished to return to
his native country.

But then we have a circumstance presented
to us, on the part of the crown, which is
supposed to be a most formidable circum-
stance ; and you are to imagine, that although
Mr Crossfieid was now about to return (un-
willingly, as the crown pretend — willingly
and rejoicipgly, as we have proved) to his na-
tive country, that he was extremely afraid of
having it known that he was so returning, and
thecefore he assumed the name of Wilson.

Now, gentlemen, you cannot but have ob-
served how completely the evidence for the
crown falls short of affording the inference
which they wish to draw from it Mr. Cross-
field is stated to have ||imself inserted his
name in the muster-roll as Henry Wilson, and
that he was taken on board the Hope. To
whom was that muster-roll to be returned f
— to the commissary at Brest. Was it to be
sent to this country ? It is not pretended that
it was.

Then you will recollect the evidence of
Colmer, one of the constables of Fowey, who
stated, that when he inquired for him on
board the ship he immediately answered to
the name of Crossfieid. It is not affected to
be stated, that he then made any sort of pre.-
tence that his name was Wilson. Therefore,
I have the fact most completely with me, that,
as far as regarded this country (respecting
which, and respecting which alone, he could
have had any wish to conceal his name), he

les}

for High 7V#a«on.

A. D. 17d6.

[166

did not endeavour to conceal his name, but
answered directly to the name of Crossfield.

But here is another of the improbabilities
with which this case is attended. Is it to be
supposed, if Mr. Crossfield wished to oome
iolo this country, concealing his name, tliat
he could have done it (considciing the com-
pany in which he came) in a cartel, with a
vast number of prisoners with whom he had
Msaded many months in France, and resided
with them under the name of Crossfield ?
Be came with some of those persons with
whom he certainly was not upon verv good
terms, as is clearly proved by the demea-
nor of those witnesses, and by the express
declarations of dislike which they have made
jo court. Is it to be imagined, therefore, that
if be was afiraid of being apprehended for hieh
treason upon his return into this country, he
would be ao complete an ideot as to raise ad-
<litional susfncions to those which they had
before conceived ? — ^that he was a person ob-
Boxioas to the government of this country,
and therefore could not venture to return to
thistountrv under his own name?

But I will suppose that a copy of this mus-
ter-roU was to be sent to this country ; then
recollect another fact, which shows how com-
pletely the probability is with me in the reason
whv Mr. Crossfield should insert the name of
Wilson in the muster-roll at Brest — Palmer
has stated, that at the time when he last saw
Mr. Crossfield, all his property had been as-
sigrird over for the benefit ot his creditors,
and that he was then in debt. You know per-
fificUy well, that the names of prisoners coming
over in cartels are commonly inserted in the
Eoglnh newspapers; and, therefore, if the
name of Crossfield had been inserted in the
English newspapers, as returning on board a
cartel from France, that was certainly hkely
to bring upon him some troublesome creditor,
and be might have lost that liberty to which
be had been so very lately restored. Then I
pot it to you, whether, talking these facts to-
gether, it is nut infinitely more probable that
the fear of creditors induced Mr. Crossfield to
take the name of Wilson at that moment, than
tluit which the crown suggest — the fear of
being spprebended for high treason? The
teaaoa I assign is still farther enforced by
this consideration, that he is supposed to
have made declarations of his having lieen ac-
tually guilty of high treason to those persons
with whom he came over, and who conse-
4|uently must have had their suspicions still
more excited by his changing his name.

Gentlemen, I have now taken such a brief
and imperfect view of the case as I have felt
myself able to take, certainly, not in the man-
ner in which I could have wished to have
done it, because I could have wished to have
discharged my duty to the prisoner with infi-
nitfsly nx>re efiiect than I have powers to dis-
charge it; but I trust that the observations
wlu<£ I have made to you will not be totally
without their effect; and 1 have Ae less

anxiety, because I am sure the opening of
the prisoner's case by my learned friend Mr«
Adam, cannot have failed to have produced
the strongest conviction in your minas ; and I
should have been extremely reluctant to have
gone over all the ground which was so aUy
trodden by him, because I should have risked
weakening the impression which I am sure his
address to you must have made.

Give me leave, then, gentlemen, in a single
word, to recall your attention to the nature of
the proof which has been given by the crown
in support of this indictment

There must be two witnesses to an overt
act, or one witness to one overt act and anotlier
^to another. It appears to me, thai the evi.
*dence for the crown can be supposed to apply
to only one of the overt acts in the indictment
— ^To that one, I contend, they have not pro*
duced two witnesses; because one witness
only speaks to the identity, and another
speaks to the transaction ; and that witness
who speaks to the identity, absolutely ex-
cludes all idea of any criminal coucem in the
transaction; and, indeed, he who does not
speak to the identity does not impute to the
pierson who is supposed to be the prisoner any
criminal concern in the transaction.

This being the case, I conteofd, that the
defect is not to be cured, and cannot be cured
by any auxiliary evidence whatever — that the
only witness who has attempted to prove a
confession of an overt act is Le Bretton, and
that the overt act which Mr. Crossfield is sup-
posed to have confessed to Le Bretton, is not
one of those overt acts upon which the crowa
have offered any evidence.

Therefore, gentlemen, the question is,
whether the prisoner stands in that condition
that he is to be considered as provably
attainted of open deed of compassing and
imagining the death of the king acoordmg to
all the strict requisites which the wisdom of
the law of England has provided* I submit
to you, that the crown have completely failed
in establishing that proo^ and that therefore
he is intitled to your acquittal.

Gentlemen, you cannot but feel inipressed
upon your minds on the one hand, the im«
portance of this case to the public, and on the
other, the deep and the last importance it is
of to the prisoner at the bar. • Ir the prisoner
is guilty^ and is proved to be so by evidence
which at once satisfies tlie requirements of
the law, and completely convinces your minds,
unquestionably it imports the public, that by
your verdict he should be pronounced to be
guilty. But unless the crown have given that
proof which does amount to that complete
demonstration which the law of England re-
quires, sure I am you will not pronounce the
verdict which must shed that man's blood —
that verdict which if pronounced, in a few
days the awful sentence of the law must be
executed upon him. He must be hanged by
the neck, but not until he is dead ; ha roust
be cut down being yet alive ; be oust be emr,

167]

S« GEORGE m.

Trial ofR^tHThmu CrostfiM

Ilea

bowrdled^ and dismember^. So awful and
60 dreadful a sentence will awaken in your
minds all the cautidn jrou can possibly apply
to this case, and weighing it with that cau-
tion which I am sure you will apply to it, I
trust you will pronounce a yerdict of hot

OUILTT.

Lord Chief Justice £yr<. — Mr. Crossfield
you haye been heard in your defence by your
coimsel, you have also a ri^ht to be heard in
your own person, if you thmk fit to ofier any
thing to the jury.

Primmer, — M^ lord and gentlemen of the
jury, I have nothing to add to what has been aU
ready stated by my counsel, except, that how-
ever, occasionally, I may have appeared
imprudent in words or m actions, I am
totally incapable of the atrocious crime laid
to my chargR? Farther I say not^ but rest my
case satisfied with my own mnocence and the
justice of an English jury.

Mr. Attommf'General, — ^As I find Le Brct«
ton is now come, we will, with your lordships
permission, ask him a question or two.

John Xe Bretion, called again — Examined by

Mr. Xav.

Do you know Mrs. Smith, No. 17, Great
Hermitage^treetP — Bv sisht

Where Cro6sfieldlodgeaP—«I do not know
that be lodged there.

Do you remember having any conversation
with her, in which she made any inquiries
about yourexlimination before the privy coun-
cil f — Yes ; I remember she asked me two or
three times what I bad said.

Are you sure that the conversation began
hy her asking you, or your voluntarily telling
her ? — By her asking me.

You are sure of tlut f — I am certain of it

Do vou remember her saying any thing
aartiduar respecting the evidence you might
be called upon to give in tliis place against
any person ? Was any thing said about the
manner in which that cvi£ooe should be
given, favourably or otherwise ? — ^Before I was
subpoenaed she said she hoped I would not say
any thing to hurt the prisoner.

Did you say any thing in answer to that f
— I told her I should speak the truth if I was
jcalied upon; I did not know whether it would
hurt him or not

Was that the whole of what you said f — I
believe that is, as near as I can recollect, that
I would speak the truth.

Did she make any observation upon that ?—
Yes ; she said <' truth is not always to be
spoken you' know."

Are you sure she said so? — Most certainly
I am.

And that she began the inquiry of her own
accord, as to the examination before the privy
council ? — Yes.

Lord Chief Justice £^re.— Mr. Giirney, do
you wish to make any observations upon this
evidence f

Mr. GurfMy-^-No, my lord ; I do not tbiok

any observation necessary.

Reply.

Mr. Attorni^ G«iiera(.— Gentlenea df the
jury ; — When I rise to address you ia thia
stage of the business, which you are met ta
determine upon, I can assure you thai there i^
no man who feds more than I do, an awful
sense of the importance of the duty which,
you have to execute.

Gentlemen, you will permit me to aay faiu
ther, that if there be a circumstance to which,
at this moment, when I ain rising with a fiill
conviction in my own mind that! am entitled
to ask at your hands, upon the evidence which
youhave neard,a verdict of guilty, — I say' if
there be a circumstance, to which I can
look with satisfaction at this moment, or to
which I can hope to look with satisfaction at
any fiiture period of my life, it u this — ^that
the constitution of my country, in the admi-
nistration of its justice, protects those, whom
it.bmy duty to prosecute, against any error-
into which I may fall, either m matter of law^
or with respect to the conclusion that ought,
as to fact, to be drawn from the evidence ; by
interposing, between my observations and the
fate of the prisoner, the advice of the wisdon^
that presides here, and the conscientious di»*
charge of your duty as a jury, which I am
«ure the country and the prisoner will receive
at your hands.

Gentlemen, I know too well the operatioiia
of my own mind, guarding it as much as I caa
against fall impressions, not to feel that I am
unable sufficienUy to protect my judgment
against the tendency which a prosecutor*a
view of the case has to mislead it. When I
call therefore upon you, on behalf of tko
countiy, for a veraict of guilty, it is, and eve»
will be to me, a most lasting satisfiiction. thai
between the judgment that I form, and the
fate of that individual, you are first to receive
the advice and direction of those whose doQr
it is^ according to tlie constitution, to advise
and direct you ; and you are then to deters
mine whether this prisoner is or is not guiHyr
of this charge.

Gentlemen, I agree to every observatioii
which has been stated to you, with respect to
the importance of this case; but thia is not a
case important only on one side. GentWmen,
the fate of Mr. Crossfield, wlio stands now
before you upon his deliverance, ia the fote of
a person whose life is undoubtedly pveeiouaio
the eye of the law, whose life ought to be
precious to your couKiences^ because it ia
precious in the view of that Qod who made
you and him. You will however reooUeot
also, that you owe a duty lo the country, by, m
veix&ct according to evidence, to give pn>«
tection, according to law, to the lifo of the se^
vereigu, whose life, I may venture to state^ is
at least as dear to the law of En^nil, as that
as any man who is hi^ subject The subject
and the'Sorereign are entiUcd to.xectiya mat

169] fs^ High Tfiowu.

jrott Um prolecUoii of Ihe law : if ia this casta
verdict of not guUtjr be due to the person who
stands before you, God forbid that any coosi-
deratioD of tbe inipHrtaiiee of the life of the
soverei^ should induce you to deal out the
least injustice t^the unfortunate prisoner, who
now stands at your bar. But a juat verdict
tbe country hath a right to receive al your
hands.

GenUemcn, with respect to tho law of this
case, it appears to me that this case has no dif-
culty, in matter of law, in it. This is uotacase
of such tifason as is sometimes represented as
constructive treason, and fay a variety of other
lumesgwhich occur in the books and in the his-
tory of legal proceedings in this country. But
it is a case in which no question of difficulty,
with respect to the law, can be stated to a
Jury of the country ; it is the simple case of a
direct attack against the life of that person^ to
compass or imagine whose death, when a
measure is taken for that purpose (whether
the measure be effectual, or not effectual for
tbe purpose^ is treason under the express let-
ter of tbe law. The questions therefore,
which you have to try, I apprehend are these :
Did the prisoner do any such act as any of
those which are charged in this indictment?
Did be do any such act with the intent charg-
ed by this indictment? Is it proved that he
did such act with such intent by competent
and sufficient leeaV-evidence? And this last
<|uestion, I apprenend, I may state to you as
inckiding the sense of the statute 9f ]&lwaiU
3rd, when it speaks of the person indicted
"^ being provably attainted of open deed, by
people of bis own condition.'' That the &ct
was done, you must be satisfied before ^ou
can convict; that the fact was doi^e, with
the intent charged by the indictment, you
must also be satisfied ; if your minds are sa-
tisfied on these pointSy it only remains for you
to ooosider, imoer the advice which you will
receive in matter of law, whether tpe fiiet is
proved, and the intent is proved, according to
tbe nilesof that law, thenenefit and protec-
tion of which yott are bound to dispense to
this prisoner.

Gentlemen of the jury, this case has been
very ably stated to you on the part of the pri-
soner ; that statement has consisted partly of
Socrai observations upon a general view of
B case«and partly of particular remarks, upon
the particular expresaioos, and the particular
contents and import of the evidence, which
has been gyveal^ each and eveiysiofthawit-

GentleaieD, you will give me Icava todo
BOW, — ^whaS I attempted to doini'the outset--
to lay ont ofthecase entifely the ihct, that there
ever' did exist such a pesson as the man whose
name you have so often heard, i piean
UploD.

Gentlemen, I opened Una case to. you by
statias, as stronglV as I could, that if he
were here to give his evidenoe, it must have
been nest anxiously watched; it appeased

A. D. 1796. iWk

to me, at least, that v^n a matt came, char]^
ine himself, out of his own mouth, with aq
onence tbe mos| heinous that can be sti^t^
not merely in a political view, but in a mora)
view — for this is not a. mere political offencon
as affecting the king as king, hut looking at
it with a view to the character of those who
Sidmit themselves to be guil^ of it^ it is aa
enormous a moral ofience as it can enter into
the heart of4Ban to endeavour to p^petrata
r-when such a man came to give evidence^
his testimony must be heard wjth great jei^
lousy. When the witness must fiive beei^
bound to admit in his testimony that he had,
to a certain extent, embarked m a project to
murder an individual in the country, I am
sure, gentlemen, I shall not withdraw from
what \ have before stated in the cutset, tha|
if you could not find, in the rest of ^e evi«
dence laid before };ou, sufficient reason to
affect the life of a third person, I shoukl never
have asked you for a verdict against the life
of a man upon any credit you could give tq
such a witness alone.

Gentlemen, I lay out 9f the case also aU
the evidence, wbiph has been offered to you
on the part of the defendant with respect to
the malice, with which this fnan, Upton, haa
been supposecl to act. In the first plac^
with re^ird t^ the present prisoner, sUi tho
evidence from the beginning to the end of \\
(I beseech you to do so with respect to every.
particular, in the whole of the eyi4«ncep
where ^ojur mixyis feel a leaning ioi f^jvour of
the prisoner), \ think I may state to you tha|
there is not a single tittle m it that amovnta
even to evidence, deserving the name of sugn
gestion, or even of insinua^pa, that UptoQ
ever hsid any malice whatever against Crosse
field, the prisoner. With respect lo the othet

ersons, whom he accused, { mean Smithy Le
aitre. and Hig^ns, it ia extremely ohvioua
upon tne evidenee (for Go4 forbid I shouhl
seek to conceal from you any fact that doca
appear the fair result of the evidencf ), thai
between him and some of those perqiMifl, if
not ^1 of them, there had been a qtiarrel,
whictig if you please so to take it, had led to
mat rancour, and great malice upon hia part.
One of the witnesses has told yoi^ that with
respect to Le Maitre, at kasL a leoouciliatiM
had taken place. I think I might ask you,
wqqKisiQg tnis was a questkui between, wtfk

C' } present prisoner and UptQO» but between
Maitre, Higg^ns, and Smith, and Upton^
if he had been examined aa a witness wbei
ther any thing at all coBffltisive is provec^ aAe^
it is esUblished that a man brings fovvacd a
chaxgfi, actuated by a puKposa of malicainsa
doing ? That you are boipod as men •( eonn
science to sift a chaige, so hioi^t fiisamrd,
to the bottom i that you are bound to see that
the malice of the man's mind doea 9ol mis-i
lead^im in point of veracilji; that you.u^
bound to suspect that it nny mislead him ia
point of veraoity; that you ace bound lo.hia
jiMlousy leat that maUoamay ciaafee in hia

171]

S6 GEORGE III.

Trial qf Robert Thomas CrossfiiU

[178

mind the prejudices that may lead him to eo
beyond the truth, when he is charging the
person accused, is that, which it is not only
my duty to admit, but it would be my duty,
ki a case which called for it, to press most
strongly in favour of the prisoner upon your
Attention. But, on the other hand, I should
neither be speakins; the language of the law
of England, nor tne language of common
sense, if I should say that in every case in
which a man brings forward a charge, be-
cause he has malice in his mind, the charge
b false; that it is therefore false, because the

Serson who makes it is malicious. The ma-
ce may be his reason for bringing forward
the charge, but it will always be a question
for a jury to determine whether, supposing
the malice to be the motive for his bnnginjg
forward the charge, there is or is not evi*
dence of the truth of that charee, which ma-
lice leads him to bring forward. Now I beg
your attention to the evidence itself, as to
this matter: throughout all that has been
stated, on the part of the prisoner, with re-
spect to Upton's malice, if it even applied to
Mr. Crossneld, which there is no pretence in
the world to say that it does, there is not the
least admission in all the language which
Upton holds upon the subject, that the charge
which be had made was not true. He (Upton)
has stated a reason, and a very bad reason,
undoubtedly, for brineing forwud that charge
of guilt, in which he nimSelf participated, but
he has never stated to any of the witnesses
produced, any thing like an admission that
the charge itself was not true. The amount
of all he said is this : it is true that I have
brought forward this charge. I insist upon
the truth of the charge. 1 implicate mvself
in the guilt. I do not pretena to say there
was innocence any where. I assert that there
was guilt every where. It may be true that
I have a malicious motive for bringing it for-
ward. But, gentlemen, be that as it may, and
whether he was or was not reconcQed to Le
Maitre, whether he was or was not reconciled
to Smith and Higgins, whether he was or was
not unfriendly to them, or any of them, at the
time he broueht forward the charee against
all the four, there is not one single tittle of
evidence, not one firom the beginning of this
cause to the end of it, which even imputes to
him— nay, the tendency of the questions put
by my learned firiends, in tbeur examinations,
and cross-examinations, does not impute to
him that he had uay malice against the pri-
soner, against thb individual, upon whose
&te you are now to decide. But, centlemen,
suppose you take him to be as wicked and as
malicious as thev represented him to be, what
has that fact to do with this case P Have I laid
before you one single word of evidence, as to
that niao^s declarations, made before any ma-
l^tmte ? Before any magistrate in the privy
council ? Before the privy council ? Or made
anjr where? Have I not put the case to you.
desiring that all that could have been stated

should be forgotten— that it should be for«
gotten wholly— if a single syllable of it has
found its vray into the evidence ? I have en-
deavoured not to bring before you, lest it
should endaneer yom consciences, one single
word of decurations made by that man,
Upton. I have ]iroved, indeed, some parti-
cular facts, with resp^t to certain things
which Were in his possession ; with reference
to which faets I shall have to trouble you
with some observations presently; but all
testimony as to his declarations you may ut-
terly disregard ; and when you come to de-
termine between your country and the pri-
soner^ you will be so good as to decide this
case, assuming as a fact that Upton never in
his life knew any thing relative to the tmns-
aclion, except what is proved to have passed
in the presence of the prisoner ; and that he
never uttered one word about this matter, ex-
cept what he is proved to have uttered in that
presence. Gentlemen, I am content to go
farther, for I can agree that, as to Upton, you
should not only believe that he has said no-
thing more ; but such is the nature of the
proof in this case, that you should even act
upon the supposition that if he had been here

K resent, in order to be examined, he might
ave spoken favourably for the prisoner. I
have no objection to your taking it even in
that point of view. The proof is such, that
even then the result of it cannot be misun-
derstood. The case comes to this. Is there,
upon the evidence, indepen<tent of all the
transactions in which Upton may or may not
have had a concern, sufficient testimony to
establish that the person at the bar did con-
spire, either with Le Maitre, Smith and
Higgins, or with any other persons, for the
purposes mentioned m the indictment? Or is
there upon the evidence^ independently of all
such transactions, sufficient testimony to es-
tablish that he, if not in conspiracy with them
or others, did any such acts as can be con-
sidered as charged against him alone in the
indictment, for such purposes ? My lord, I
hope, will go along with me,, by-and-by, in
what I am about to^tate to you ; or^ on the
other hand, I trust he will do that, which I
am sure I need not entreat him to do, and
which I shall be most thankful to him for
doing, he will correct my view of the sul^eot.
I say, did the prisoner conspire with the
persons named^ or with any other persons ? If
Smith, Le Maitre, and Higgins are as inno-
cent in ^t, es I am bound at this moment to
suppose that they are ; yet, if this prisoner
conspired with Upton, Palmer, or any other
persons, as i#itharged in the first overt act
laid in the indictment, and if the oonspiiacy
was with the intent charged in the indict-
ment; and if there is legal evidence. both of
the fact of the conspiracy, and of the intent
with which the conspiracy is charged to have
been entered into, then the prisoner must bo
found guihy. I say^ moreover, that, putting
all conspinugr out of the case, and supposing

t

ns]

Jbr High Treaum,

A. O. 1796.

[174

thsl no roan living, except the pment pri-
soner, can be charged with any guilt, yet if
this prisoner did timt which is stated as the
second overt act, or if he did any such acts as
are stated in the record, where the purpose
of putting the poison in the arrow is left out ;
if he employed Hill, for instance, as to the
drawings or model of the instrument, whether
in concert or not in concert with other per-
sons, who did or did not know his intent, if
such circumstances be proved sufficiently,
though against him sinely, and his acts are
proved to have been done with the intent
cbarsed in the indictment, and proved by
legal evidence; I say, moreover, that then
also you are bound, speakine always under
the conrection of my lord, to nnd the prisoner
guilty, I agree that, if neither the facts of the
conspiracy, nor his own acts, as charged in the
record, are made out, or if they are not made
out as connected with the intent charged in
the indictment, or if made out with the mtent
charged in the indictment, they are not esta-
bltal£db^ legal formal testimony, you can-
not convict the prisoner. There may be very
mat inconvenience, perhaps, in the state of
tne law with respect to proceedings in
cases of this kind ; out God Almiehty forbid
that I should ask you, or that you should treat
me otherwise than with some degree of in-
dignation, if I did ask you to find any man
guilty upon any other state of the law than
such as it is, when vou are sworn to decide
upon the fiicts according to it.

Gentlemen of the jury, the first question
put to you by the prisoner's counsel, by wav
of general observation, is this } it is said, with
what jnotive could the prisoner possibly do
these things 7 Why, how is it possible for men
in courts of justice, administering the law, to
answer that question better tlianl}y referring
to the motive, to which the law ascribes
such facts? If you shoiUd be satisfied, in the
result, that these thinzs were meant, the
conclusion of law upon the case is, and it must
be the conclusion of fact, that the motive was
that which the law calls a malicious one.
Gentlemen, the purpose — and this does not
depend upon the evidence of the sailors from
Brest — Uie purpose was at least a secret one.
Why was it a secret purpose f You will re-
collect that the first witness, Dowding, speaks
to you with regard to the application made to
him by Upton, and also the prisoner Cross-
field (for It was proved afterwards by Mr.
Palmer that Crossfield was the person who
went to Dowding. with Upton and with him-
self); that he tells you that he inquired for
what purpose the tube was wanted ; and that
the answer was, that, with respect to the pur-
pose, it was a secret. I repeat to you, gen-
tlemen, what I observed in opening the pro-
secution^ and I. submit to your candour that
the observation is fair, that when you see an
instrument framed, such as that which has
been described, calculated to be used for such
dangerous purposes as Mr. Mortimer proved

upon bis oath last night that it was capable
of being applied to ; vrhen you sec that a fea-
thered arrow was intended to be fabricated,
capable of being used for the most mischiev-
ous purposes; and when you see, beyond all
question^ that the prisoner at the bar is im-
plicated in the fact of being concerned in the
framing and fabrication of tnese things : and
when you hear besides tlie testimony of four
persons (if I am to reckon Mr. Winter as one,
with respect to whom I shall say a word to
you presently), or the testimony of three pei-
sons, against whose integrity, against the

Surity of whose motives there has not
een even a suspicion intimated in this
court; when you hear from them for what
purpose of mischief these things were
stated out of the mouth of the prisoner him-
self to have been framed and fabricated, I re-
peat to you tha\, in such circumstances, some
attempt ought to be made on the part of the
prisoner (and none has been made) to satisfy
your consciences what was really the purpose
intended by those who fabricated these things,
if the purpose intended was not, in truth, that
which is charged upon this record, and that
'Which the prisoner has fif\y times over, if
you give credit to Mr. Winter^ avowed it
to be.

Gentlemen of the jury, you have heard ob-
servations upon the state of the times, whea
this accusation was broueht forward. You
have heard that the times had a tendency to
encourage plots. You have heard of the
trials for high treason. You have been put in
mind of the event of those trials for high
treason. The juries of the country adminis*
tered the justice of the country; and of the
administration of the justice of the countiy, I
am not the individual who means to sav
otherwise than that it is well administered.
I know that the constitution of this country,
the life of the sovereign, every blessing which
we can enjoy in the country, is finally to find
its security in the verdicts of juries, fiul how
do any observations upon those trials, either
with respect to the magnitude of them, or the
nature of them, or the event of them, or upon
any transactions respecting them, applv to
this sort of case? Gentlemen, did thos^
trials induce Upton to stand forward to charge
these people with a plot ? Be it so. But do you
think that those trials, or the transactions which
had relation to them, induced all these brass-
founders to conspire? That thejr induced
these sailors when at Brest, to conspire ? And
that, in order to help out Upton*s story, re-
presented to have been made out for his own
safety (though I de not see how that could
have beSen ao effectually put in danger, as by
his own relation of his own guilt), all these
brass-founders and sailors have been induced,
by the state of the times to give the evidence
which you have heard? Surely there are, in this
case, circumstances of the most singular kind
that ever happened, if Upton coinedthc whole
of this plot. There are no less than four bras»-

I7i3

S6 GEORGE III.

Trial of RobeH Thmat Croufidd

[176

founders in En^aml who rekte that, in fact,
application was made to them for the purpose
t>r tabricatine such an instrument, as he says
was intended to be framed. There are, then,
very singular circumstances in the conduct of
the prisoner. You find the prisoner absconding
88 it he was guilty ; you find the person avow-
ing the plot which Upton was bringing for-
ward : declaring his guilt ; making declara-
tions respecting the purpose of the fabrication
of this instrument, and the nature of the in-
strument, such as you have heard : and you
find three or four witnesses coming along
with that prisoner from a distant country, un-
impeacheo, and unimpeachable in character,
swearing before you and before Gtod, to his
declarations of his piilt, as declarations so
leriously made as to impress them in the man«
Ber they have mentioned. Can all this origi-
nate from the times, and the state trials ?

Another circumstance has been stated, of
improbability arising from the nature of the
place where this plot was to be executed; I
mean Covent-garden theatre. The theatre hu
1)ecn mentioned, as you recollect, by two or
three of the witnesses who came from
Brest Why, gentlemen, God be thanked, it
is perhaps the best securi^ we all have against
the wickedness of men who are disposed to
IKt wickedly towards us, that such purposes
t>f 'the heart are not always conducted under
the influence of the wisest heads ; but I see
no improbability in this. I know, from
the history of transactions in this country,
that in open day light, that in the open
streets of this town, through a very con-
siderable part of this town, the person of
the sovereign may be attacked, and yet
that it is impossible to find out the indi-
vidual who is guilty of the outrage. With
respect to the place, therefore, it appears to
me to be a place as well adapted for such a
purpose, considering how Mr. Mortimer
states that it could be executed, as any other
place. But whether the place was well or
judiciously chosen or not for the purpose, I
am persuaded my lord will tell you, if a step
was taken for the fabrication of this instru-
ment, that that step, though an injudicious
one, is a sufficient overt act {if it be suffici-
ently proved) to manifest that compassing
and imagination which makes the crime
within the statute.

Another observation was stated to you,
that you had here a strange set of conspirators,
ignorant of the nature of airjguns. If they
were ignorant of the nature ofair-guns, they
took some pains to inform themselves of the
nature of air-guns^ and to remove that igno-
rance. They applied to Cuthbert,"who, vou
lecollect, informed youtliat an*air-gun had
1)een shown to two persons that came to
him ; but Mr. Mortimer must have satisfied
you, if that fsu^t to which Cuthbert deposed
was a fact which showed the ignorance of
the persons concerned, that at least they had
become so wise in this profession of making

air-guns before the model was finally
delivered to Hill, that though Mr. Mortimer
tells you it is not very skilfully done, yet
he says that from that model he should
collect that an air-gun was intended to be
made : that though it is not the'handy work
of a skilful artist, it is a sufficient paper to
enable a person, understanding the subject,
to fabricate an air-gun : and with verbal in-
formation, Mr. Mortimer says, even that part
of the wooden model, which has been pro-
duced to you, might be adapted to the faDri-
cation of this daneerous instrument.

Gentlemen, it has farther been stated to
you, by way of a general observation, that
Crossfield and Upton's acquaintance had been
very short. Now that tends a little against a
former suggestion, that he could have malice
against ImTCrossfield. No circumstance has
even been hinted at that could, in that short
acquaintance, infuse into his mind any malice
against the present prisoner. Short how-
ever as their acquaintance was, they had be-
come excessively, intimate: for it does not
depend only upon this fact, via. that Mrs.
Upton has sworn thai she has often seen
them together, but it is clear tfiat, short as
their acquaintance was, they were intimate
enough together to set about the fabrication
of an instrument, capable at least of being
applied to purposes of extreme danger. Their
acquaintance was long enough (that is out of
all question) to lead them together from
Upton's shop to one brass-founder's in the
city; to lead them together to another brass-
founder's; and from him again tu a third;
from him to a fourth ; and frum him to Hill,
and there to deliver to that person the paper,
which will be exhibited to ^ou, and which I
have now in my hand, which contains the
drawing of the wooden part of this instru-
ment. I think you will see clearly that their
acgnaintance had been lone enongh, and suf-
ficiently intimate to introduce them to so
much of connexion with each other, as to in-
duce Mr. Crossfield to become a party to the
fabrication, or at least to the drawing the
model of this instrument, containing the re-
presentation of the figure of that arrow, which
mieht be replete with poison, as Mr. Mortimer
tells ^ou. and at all events was replete with
infinite oanger.

Gentlemen of the J urv, another observa-
Uon has been made, which is this ; that there
was no proclamation for Mr. Crossfield till
the month of February. Be it so. In the
first place, you will recollect that Mr. Palmer^
who was called to you, and I say no more of
him than that he was an unwilling witness ;
that Mr. Palmer informed you that he had
undertaken to procure his attendance ; and it
IS not immatenal that he had undertaken to
procure his attendance too, according to his
evidence as a witness. Moreover, I appre-
hend that any man who understands a sub-
ject of this kind, will go along with me
in believing that a proclamatioa with a

177]

Jor High Treason*

reward, is that which is full as likely to
send the person described Id it out of the
country, as to procure his attendance in
it; and whilst Palraer*s engagement to
procure the attendance of Mr. Crossfield
stood good, till there was no hope that that
attendance, would be procured according to
that pTomisey I must take leave to state that
il would have been a very imprudent measure
to have issued such a proclamation. But if
this be otherwise— how can such a circum-
stance blow out of court the effect of all the
rest of the evidence, which has been given you
in this caseP And with respect to fact^ if
there would be any justice in the observation
which I have been making upon general prin-
cipleSy does not the conduct of Mr. Crossfield,
wncn this proclamation is issued, most dis-
tinctly and clearlv prove that it was not a
measure calculatea to procure his attendance ?
The prisoner, ^ou have seen, led London,
and went to Bristol, when this matter was
first brought forward by Upton. It is stated
by Palmer, that he went there for the purpose
ot'considering whether he should not establish
himself there in the medical line ; he inti-
mates that that was his purpose. Now you
will permit me to submit to your judgment
thb observation; that it is impossible but
that the prisoner, before he went tliere, must
have known that Upton had made a charge
against Smith, Le Maitre, aud Higgins : that
facty beyond all doubt, he must know. Then
either he knew Smith, Le Maitre, and Hig-
einsto be innocent, or he new nothing of
tne matter with respect to them, and be did or
did not know himself to be innocent. If he was
himself innocent, you will be pleased to re-
collect that it is proved, beyond contradiction,
that he had taken this part at least with
Upton, namely, to go to all the brass-
founders, and to proceed in the fabrication of
this instrument to the extent to which it is
prov^ be did proceed, by bein^ a party to
these drawings, from which Hill fabricated
th« wooden models. He was certainly then a
person who could give information upon this
subject It was absolutely due to Smith, Le
Maitre, and Higgins, that Crossfield, if he
knew as much oT this matter, as it is proved
beyond a Question that he did know ; and if
he knew that the transactions, up to this pe-
riod, had been connected with no manner of
guilt, it was his duty to them to have
come forward, and to have stated the
transactions as they were, and to have as-
sisted in clearing these men, who have been
represented this day as innocent. If he was
innocent himself, he came forward without
any danger. If he was guilty, or if there
were circumstances that would implicate him
in a strong suspicion of guilt, he might have
a reason for not appearing at the privy council
as a witness. He goes however to Bristol
upon the errand which has been mentioned.
The names of any persons whom he saw there
are not mentkined in evidence : his making
VOL. XXVI.

A. D. 1796. [178

an}; inquiry, in reference to the purpose for
which he went there, has not been given in
evidence. He comes up to town*, he does
not go to his lodgings in DyerV buildings : he
does not even call there, during the whole
time he is in town : he goes to a lodging in
Wapping, a singular removal for a medical
man who meant to settle at Bristol, accordiug
to Palmer's evidence. The evidence of
Palmer, who had been with him at Bristol,
who states his privity to his purpose of going
to Bristol, who had seen him at Bristol, his
farther evidence, if I take it rightly, is this,
that, having undertaken to bring him before
the privy council, he never saw him when
he was in town, but at his own chambers.

Then he goes down to Portsmouth. It
does not become me to represent to yop, be-
cause I think the evidence does not authorize
roe to do it, that the captain of the vessel
might not know his name ; and I shall re-
mark to you more fully presently, with re->
spect to the absence of tnis and other cap-
tains. I think that in the absence of these
captains, whatever they might probably know
favourable to the prisoner you ought to con-
sider them as knowing, and give him the be-
nefit of all the supposition that you can make
in his favour. I will put the case then, if
you please, that captain Clarke knew the
name of the prisoner : it does not appear whe-
ther the rest of the crew did know it or not :
but it appears that he went by the name of
the Doctor, from the time he embarked at
Portsmouth till they went to Falmouth. He
appears to have been repeatedly on shore at
Portsmouth, and it is fit I should state that
for his benefit. At Falmouth, as the evidence
stands, be never was on shore but once.
Whether you ought to collect from the nature
of the account that has been given, anv reason
to suppose that he remained on board for the
purpose of concealment, I rather leave to
your judgment to decide, than to take upon
myself to determine. However, this is clear,
that there is, in point of fact, no one witness
who hears this man say any thing with respect
to his own situation, as connected with this
project, till after they had sailed from Fal-
mouth ; and it is a material thing that the
conversation of this man relative to this pro-
ject, when he says that Pitt vi^ould send a
frigate aAer him if he knew where he was,
begins two days after the vessel had sailed
from Falmouth, upon a voyage, which, as one
of my learned friends most truly states to
you, generally endures fifteen or eighteen
months, or more, and in the course ofwhich
there is no land to touch at Haying left
Falmouth, he begins the conversation with
one of the persons, in which he says, that
Pitt would send a frigate after him. He is
afterwards captured, and carried into the har-
bour of Brest: while he is there, it appears
now to be in evidence from the defendant's
own witnesses, that he stood at least in a si-
tuation of so little dislike among the persons

N

179]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomas Croufdd

[180

with whom he was living, that it has heen
stated that he might have had a situation of
advantage there. Gentlemen, you will re-
collect, with reference to that, that it is proved
hy other witnesses, that he stated before he
leA Brest that he had settled matters to his
satisfaction, and, having settled matters to
his satisfaction, what is it that he does ? He
assumes the name of Wilson; and he not only
assumes the name of Wilson, hut he does this
also, he takes the name of Wilson, as a per-
son of that name captured in the ship Hope.
Now, an observation has been offered to your
attention of this sort, namely, 1j)at he was
afiraid of his creditors in this cotmtiy. Sup-
posing he changed his name to Wilson, on

^ account of his creditors in this country.

* what occasion had he to state that he was
captured in the ship Hope? Would his cre-
ditors have found him out more readily by the
name of Wilson, captured on board the I^o-
mona, than by the name of Wilson captured
on board the Hope ? It is impossible tor me
to account for that circumstance. It is my
duty to mention to you what my learned friend
who spoke last stated — that government
knew the names of the persons wno came on
shore in this country. — It might ^e his pro-
ject to take the name of Wilson, as captured
in the ship Hope, with a view that it might
not be understood that the person who came
on shore at Mevaglssy, was not Wilson cap-
tured in the ship Hope, but Crossfield cap-
tured in the ship Pomona; and I dismiss that
part of the case witli saying, that I cannot
comprehend why the ship Hope was inserted
with reference to any purpose in which the
creditors could be concerned.

But, gentlemen, consider what is stated by
Pennv, whose testimony is totally uncontra-
dicted, whose character is wholly unim*
peached, and, which I have therefore a right
tosav before a British jury, is perfectly unim-
peachable. The prisoner applies to him in
the course of the voyage home — and what
does he say to him } Does he say, I beg you
will not mention that I have taken the name
of Wilson as captured in the ship Hope — for
fear my creditors should lay hold of me ? —
No: — fie says, "You remember what I
stated to you on board the Elizabeth." What
was it ha stated on board the Elizabeth ?—
That which I say is a confession- af the fact
di^rged.^He did not tell him on board the
Elizabeth, that he was afraid of his creditors,
and therefore about to change his name to
Wilson, and substitute, instead of the Po-
mona, the name of the ship Hope ; but he
tells him that he was the person engaged in
this scheme of assassinating the Kine, by
means of a tube and barbed arrow— and that
is the information which Penny is desired by
the prisoner to forget in the course of this
voyage. — Now, why he was to forget that, is
a question which your consciences must de-
termine.
But this is not all r^When he (.omes •&

shore, he is taken into custody, in conse-
quence of an information given by Winter,
who states a foolish story of a hare ; and I
am ready to admit, and think it becomes m«
to do 80, 'that that seems to my mind at least
a circumstance of such improbability, that,
if this case depended upon winter's testimonv
(though I believe a great deal of it, and I will
state my reasons by-and-by why I do so) I
should think it an extremely haxardoiis thing
to come to a conclusion against the prisoner
upon his evidence alone. Winter went before
the magistrate; and, whether Winter's un-
derstanding is considerable, or whether it is
of that ordinary sort, that entitles captaift
Collins to call him a foolish fellow, the fact is»
that the man's mind was so much impressed
with the truth of what he has relatra here
to-day, that he dki think himself bound to
state the facts to a majgistrate, and, wise, or
mad, or foolish, or whatever you please to
call him, such an understandins, as he has,
has been at least fortunate enoogh to conceive
of this business as the understanding of
three other sensible men have led them to
conceive of it, who, in point of iaet, confirm
him in every circumstance that he has stated,
except one, and that is the fact of the kinjg
having been actually shot at— Now, the pn-
soner knew in this stage of the business,
wheUier he came to this country for the pur«
pose of avoiding his creditors, under the name
of Wilson of the Hope, or whether he came
to this country under this name for the pur-«
pose of concealing a person, who was a partv
to the transaction charged upon this record.
He now knew that he was accused of this
most heinous o£fence. — ^What would have been
the conduct of Mr. Crossfield, if it was false
that he had been party to this transaction } if
it was false that any such declarations had
been made in France, as these four witnesses
have spoken to? I should be glad to know
whether it was not, in the natural course of
transactions, that Mr. Crossfield should have
said — Let me go to this magistrate: I did
leave the kingdom of Great Britain for
foolish reasons, for reasons against the in-
fluence of which Palmer the attorney, ought
to have protected me, I did leave that country
under circumstances of some degree of suspi-
cion; but I have been an unfortunate maa,
captured with my fellow prisoners in Brest. I
am sure that neither Winter nor any other of
my fellow prisoners, coming home with me
in this ship, can add to the suspicion by any
information that can be given as to what my
conduct in France has been.— But is that the
case ? — No — on the contrary, instead of meet'
ing the investigation of the maeistrate, in-
stead of avowing his innocence both m his
transactions in France and in this country—
though he' knows that the charge is made by
one of his fellow prisoners, who came over
with him, the mode which he takes to get rid
of the effect of the charge, as he is conveying
to prison, is what has been stated by two

X

iSI]

fw Hif^ Treason,

A. D. 1796.

[IS2

^blesses. Questions are put whether be was
iiotdmnk. and whether he did not fall asleep
within half an hour after he spoke of the
pistob and the post4x)y : With respect to the
efiect of the answer to these two questions,
that is for you to judge of; but there is no
evidence that he did not understand what he
said. He attempts to corrupt the officers, and
follows that up with a conversation, which I
wish to represent accurately, because it ap-
pears to my judgment excessively material. —
He says, you hadfoetter than have five shillings
from those who are to pay you if you carry
me to gaol, have two gumcas a piece from me
to let me esca^. — ^The officer man ires what
he would do with the post-boy? — His answer
is to this effect— Lend me that pistol, and I'll
scrttle that — ^This has been spoken to by two
witnesses. — Now, I put it to you, as men of
conscience, is this the conduct of an innocent
man ? Is it not the conduct of a man guilty
of something ? If it be, I say it is conduct
which proves to demonstration the truth of
what the witnesses, who come from abroad,
liave said. It does not prove the truth of
what the witnesses here have said; but it
proves a strong suspicion in the mind of the
prisoner^ that, when the persons here, who
were capable of being brought forward as wit-
nessesy were brought forward to speak to
facts, and those facts should be connected
with the effect of the declarations made
abroad, sorocthinc would be proved, from
which a jury miuit infer, that the fact, of
which be is guilty, is the fact charged upon
this record.

Gentlemen, you will allow roe now to draw
jrour attention to material and weighty ob-
servations, which have been made to you
upon that sort of evidence, which has been
termed, in the course of this business, confes-
sional.— Gentlemen,; I repeat to you again, on
behalf of myself, and every individual in the
country, that the acquittal or conviction of a
single prisoner is nothing when compared to
the sacrifice of a great ormciple of justice. If,
therefore, there is not legal clear evidence to
convict this prisoner, if ne is not ** provably
attainted*' according to the true meaning of
.those words, which my lord will state to you
presently, — ^you may perhaps see, that there
may be persons in tnis country who are in
great peril from the machinations of others
— you may perhaps see that persons in the
highest situations are in the most peril, be-
cause they are not defended by that law,
which savs, that as to offences against our
fellow subjects, one witness is sufficient —
You may see all this; but you must not
therefore convia that man. The evidence
must be such as the law requires to satisfy
your consciences : whether it wisely reouircs
such evidence, it is not for you to consiaer.^
All that I ask of you on the other hand, is,
that you will attend to the consequences of
not convicting^ if the evidence be legal, be
sufficient in point of law, in a case of so much
importaace as this.

Gentlemen, it is very true that confession,
as evidence, is open to all the weighty obser.
vations which nave been stated from tho
authors, whose works have been quoted to
you.— -Tliey speak the language of common
sense in strong terms. With respect to high
treason, the books go beyond what has been
stated ; if there was no evidence but confes-
sion, I am ready to admit, if that confession
had been made before twenty witnesses, yet
so much has the law guarded the party against
the consequences of mere confession, where
there are no facts and circumstances, estab-
lished by testimony which corroborates it,
that it would be insufficient. The law has
said that no man shall be convicted of high
treason, but upon hie own confession before a
magistrate, or in open court — ^Therefore, gen-
tlemen, if I bad called these witnesses Irom
France to state to you that this party did make
such and such declarations, and had proved
nothing else in the cause, my lord would have
told me, the moment I had stated my case,
that it was due from him to the justice of the
country to tell the prisoner that I ought to
give no evidence against him — But it is far
otherwise, when evidence of confessions is
opened — not to prove the fact done, but to
prove tlie intent with which the fact was done,
— an inteift that never can be, or but seldom
can be, collected otherwise than from such
evidence : it is far otherwise when a great va-
riety of facts and circumstances have been
proved; and when a confession is made,
proved by ^ great number of witnesses, that
confession consisting of very particular and
very singular circumstances, and those very
particular and very singular circumstances
mdentinj^, as it were, and squaring with the
facts which have been proved, in such a
manner that it is -absolutely impossible, in
the nature of things, that a man could make
the confession, who had not been connected
with the facts otherwise proved, and of
which he gives an account in , the confession.
Gentlemen, it is said, and. said truly, in
those authors, that there is great danger of

Eerjury where yon have nothmg to go upon
ut confession. But this never applies to a
case where a great number of facts and cir-
stanccs are proved; where the confession
connects itself with those facts and circum-
stances; where the proof of those facts and
circumstances by other witnesses supports
the truth of the confession, and the truth of
the confession, aids, assists, and holds up the
proof of those facts and circumstances;
where the danger of peijury therefore is
avoided by the very nature of the facts con-
fessed, by the correspondence of the matter
confessed with existing facts ; where there are
a great number of persons speaking to confes-
sions; where the confessions are made at
different and at various times, yet all corres-
ponding and connected with each other, as to
the substance of them; where the confessions
are aided by the demeanor of the partyi and

1633

36 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomat CroufieU

[184

vfhert the conduct of the party gives proof that-
the confessions he had made are founded in
truth. To illustrate this, if Penny had been
called to say, that, when he was on board the
Elizabeth in France this prisoner said so and
so, and nothing more had passed, that confes-
sion would have one degree of weight When
it is proved, not only that he said so and so, at
such a time, but that an application was made
to a man, in ihe course of the voyage home,
not to disclose the confession that he had so
made, that circumstance adds another degree
of weight. When the substance of the con-
fession spoken to by that one individual, is
spoken to by three or four other indivi-
duals, Ihe matter acquires a still ^ater de-
jgree of weight, though, after all, if you put
Inem all (the confessions) together, they would
not be sufficient evidence in the case of high
treason. But, when you have witnesses
speaking to these facts, which are the overt
jacts, — witnesses speaking to the facts of two
ior three persons applying to Hill, sometimes
two, sometimes three, to the four brass-
founders to whom applications were made, —
and when it is proved that one of the persons
engaged in eacfi and every of these applica-
tions to the brass-founders, and in the appli-
cation to Hill, was the prisoner at the bar, —
when you have two witnesses to the facts,
and the person is ascertained, and confession
is added, which shows the intent with which
these facts were done, I say the conspiracy is
fuost completely proved according to Jaw
(supposing Smith, Le Maitre, and Higgins
are perfectly innocent) and not only the con-
spiracy, but the sole acts of this nerson
amounting to treason, are proved accoraingto
Jaw. What are these confessions? are
they stated in a loose moment f are they
casual .confessions?— They are repeated con-
fessions— in four or five instances: they
make mention of circumstances as facts,
which never could be mentioned at all, if they
did not exist, and which are proved to have
existed: it is proved for instance, as the
matter of the confessions imports, that, in
point of fact, applications were made to these
brass-founders ; that applications were made
to Hill ; it is proved that drawings existed —
drawings which' described the form of an
arrow, a barbed arrow, which described a
tube, a feathered arrow; and which describe<l
the parts of a wind-gun. — Now, gentlemen,
attend to the circumstances that are stated
in all the confessions of the prisoner, the con-
fession to Dennis, the confession to Le
Bretton, the confession to Penny, the con-
fession to Winter— Do not the confessions to
these persons in Brest harbour most minutely
correspond with facts, models, and drawings
proveu to have been done and made in Eng-
land ? Perhaps you may not give Winter's
testimony any considerable credit. I will
state to you a reason upon which I submit
you ought to give him credit, notwithsUnd-
ing what you may think of the rate of his un-

derstanding. Is it not one of the most re-
markable things that ever happened, if Mr.
Crossfield had had no connexion with the
purpose charged in this indictment, that he^
in Brest, should, in the very terms of his
confession,^ describe, almost to the minutest
accuracy, every thing which is depicted
upon this paper? he speaks of an arrow,
a barbed arrow — he speaxs of a harpoon ; he
draws the form of it, to show it, as feathered,
to Winter: he speaks of the poisoned arrow :
he speaks of the tube ? he speaks of a wind-
eun ; he describes, not only the instrument,
out almost every particular which actually
belongs to, and appears in the drawing now
produced to belong to, the construction of it.
•—Gentlemen, it is said, and said verv
truly, that the weight of confession depends
upon the mind receiving the confession, and
the mind conveying the confession. But did
this ever happen nefore in any case, that a
man should in no less than four instances,
address -his confession, at four different
times, to four different persons; that these
four different persons should agree with
respect to the state of his mind when he
was convening the confession, and that the
state of their minds, when they were receiving
the confession was precisely the same, as to
each and every of them ? These four persons,
understanding him to be conveying tne state
of fact as to tnese instruments^ allagree that
the impression upon their minds was that
which they have stated to you to-day and
yesterday, it was an impression that he was
confessing his participation in the guilt now
charged upon him.

Gentlemen, the declarations of persons in
a case circumstanced as this is, are not, I
apprehend, to be Considered as confession
of facts; they are not confession of the
facts ; but they are declarations evidencing
the intention with which the facts, otherwise
proved, were done. Suppose, for instance,
that a man were to point a musket towards
his majesty, and any other person who had
the honour to be aitendine him any where.
Two witnesses swear to the fact that that
musket was pointed in such a manner, that a
jury is satisfied that it was pointed at his ma-
jesty, and not at the other person ; but, the
instrument not being actually discharged, it
remained to be triedwith what intent it was
pointed at his majesty. Is the state of the
law of this country such, that that fact of pre-
senting the musket havine been provea by
two witnesses, evidence of declarations t^ the
party with respect to his intent, connecting
themselves, as Mr. Justice Foster puts it, with
circumstances proved and with facts proved,
is not sufficient to establish the intent? — ^Is
it to be said, that, it having been shown by
the two witnesses, that the gun was so
pointed, the testimony of twenty witnesses,
proving that they had heard the man say
that he meant to discharge it at the king to
kill him, does not amount to legal evidence

183]

Jot High Tretuoiu

A. D. 1796.

1186

of bis intenl ?—*I cannot so understand the
law of Eneland : if I am wrong in that, you
wiU hear mm the wisdom that administers
the law here, that I am so, and will undoubt-
edly giTe the prisoner all the benefit that re-
suits from that correction.

What was Crohaean's case, which my lord
may recollect ? He said, * " If I go to Eng-
land, I will kill the king." The fact of his
coming to England was proved : mere words
do not amount to treason : this fact was there-
fore proved : quo animo he came to England,
was established by proof of his own declara-
tion of the intent with which he would comet
the fact of his coming to England, the overt
act, it might be necessary to prove by two
witnesses; but it is not in the nature of things
that the law should be so absurd as that this
should be held by it, that, where the fact is
distinctly proved, as lud in the indictment, a
man shall not be at liberty to eiplain his own
intent by his own declarations, or that the
law stiould shut out evidence of those decla-
rations, when other witnesses speak to them.

Having stated to vou what I conceive to be
ihe rule of law with respect to confessions,
under the correction of my lord, the case, I
take it, as proved against the prisoner, is this
— ^That he was concerned, together with Up-
t<Qi and others (whether Le Maitre, Smith, or
lii^na belonged to the conspiracy or not, is
not material for your consiaeration) in the
forming of an air-gun ; that is, to speak in the
technical langua^ of the law, his neart com-
pass^ and imagined, at least, the formation
of an air-gun; and here I go most distinctly
along with the learned judge, who intimated
yesterday, in strong ajid express terms, and
which perhaps he will repeat again to you to-
<lay, thatif weget no farther than to prove
that Mr. Cros^eld went to the brass-foun-
der's and went to Hill's, and made a model,
and meant to fabricate an air-gun, and did be-
gin to fabricate it, we have no case of treason
against Mr. Crossfield. We must make out
that these measures were taken with intent
Co effectuate (whether sufficient or not to ef-
fectuate it, will hardly be necessary for me to
discuss, after the evidence given by Mr.
Mortimer) with intent to bring about the
death of the king.

Now, with respect to the fact) that he was
concerned in the fabrication of this instru-
ment— it is beyond a doubt that three per-
sons were at Dowding's ; that three persons
were at Flintfs, is unquestionably proved;
that three persons were at another brass-
ibunder's, isunquestionablv proved ; and that
two went, I thinlc, to Bland's, Palmer not be-
ing one of the men, is also beyond doubt.
Palmer proves Crossfield to have been in thart
parly : it is proved therefore beyond all doubt,
if Palmer's evidence be taken to be true, that
Mr. Crossfield was one of the persons who
was concerned in the fact. The ract is proved
by three witnesses, viz. Dowding, Flint, and
Bland, and by another Brass-founder. The

fact of applications to brass- founders to make
such an instrument as this, is proved by four
witnesses ; and if it be proved toat Mr. Crosa-
field was one of those persons, I take it, if we
stop there, the case, as to fact, is made good.
Bland's evidence is extremely confirms by
Palmer's evidence ; for Bland states that two
persons came to him, the one of whom was
Upton : he did not know the other person.
Palmer stales in his evidence, that two per-
sons went to Bland's, that he cameto Bland's
after these two persons, and that the two per-
sons, who were there, were Upton and Cross-
field. Besides thb» it is proved in point of
fact, that all the three were at Hill's ; and Pal-
mer proves the &ct, that Crossfield was one
of the persons who was at Hill's. What was
done at Hill's, it^will be material for you to
attend to, when my lord comes to sum up.
There are more than one person to speak to
one or other of the facts charnd ; that is, to
the fact of going to the first orass-tbunder's,
then to the fact of going to the next brass-
founder's, to the fact of going to the third and
^fourth brass-founder's, and to the fact of go-
ing to Hill's; and Hill states, not only that
Upton took part with respect to the drawing,
but he expressly states as I took his evidence
(if I am incorrect, I hope my lord will set me
right, and that you will not do me the injus-
tice to suppose I am intentionally incorrectK
that the stranger, who, it has been proved,
was Crossfield, did something to the drawing
as well as Upton. So he states, though it is
not necessary to prove that fact, because I
apprehend there can be no manner of doubt,
tnat, in point of law, if the purpose of Upton
was to fabricate this instrument, with the in-
tent which we have charged in this indict-
ment; and if Mr. Crossfield, knowinjg that
purpose (of which it will be for you to judge),
attended him to these plac^and went through
the consultations alone with him, he is just
as guilty as if he had been the spokesman
upon each and everv one of those occasions.
God forbid, gentlemen, that I shoidd press
the case more slrondy than I ought; but I
must remark that these witnesses, the brasa-
founders, speak, one after another, to circum-
stances liiat require observation. One tells
you, that the persons who came, said that the
use for which the instrument was to be made
was a secret ; another seems to me to prove
that their enquiry about the expence, and
their enquiry as to the time it would take in
making, were anxious. For what particular
purpose it was to be made, the prisoner has
not explained, nor why there should be any
anxiety about the time to be employed in
making it. But when that time is made a
circumstance for enquiry, it seems to me that
the instrument must have been to be fabri-
cated to be ready at some time, which the
party was looking to, for some purpose then
to be carried into efiecU— Hill said it was to
be for an electrical machines to one witness
tl^ey represented it, yoo see, to be for a secret

1873

S6 GEORGE HI.

Trial qfRobeH Thomai Crotifidd

[188

fijq^pose ; to another, the use of it is falsely
represepied. A U these witnesses apeak of a
tube; and the declaiatioiis of Mr. Crossfield,
made in France, mentioa a tube, as well as
a barbed arrow.

Gentiemen, as to the evidence of the wit-*
oesses t9 the prisoner's declarations abroad,
is it possible tnat that evidence can be false ?
Ufon the supposition that it is not true, is it
not the most marvellous thing that ever hap-
pened in the course of human events, that the
circumstances detailed in the declarations
spoken to with respect to the existence of a
tube, witli respect to the existence of the in*
teotioa of emplovii^g an arrow — ^a barbed
arrow — a feathered arrow, in the form of a
harpoon— should every one of them receive
the semblance of truth so stroAgly from the
fact that Upton, who was alo^g with them at
these brass-founders' houses, should actually
have in his possession such a brass tube as
vas mentioned ; from the fact that this same
Upton should have in his possession this draw-
ing of an arrow, in the mmutest circumstance
tallying with the effect of those declarations,
which the wibiesaes from France inform you
were there made by the prisoner ? — Is it to
be accounted ibr, ia the nature of human
things, that the prisoner could state himself,
in these declarations, to be one of the persons
to assassinate the king with instruments, such
fA he describes in those declarations, and that
instruments, or models or drawings of instru-
ments, tallying with that description, should
be found in the possession of Upton, who was
with him when he called at these brass-
founders' houses, if the prisoner did not mean
to speak that which was the truth, and which
be knew was the truth ? Such a coincidence
of eircumstaac^s seldom happens to make
Ifood the troth of declarations, and declara-
tions are seldom found to correspond more
exactly with circumstances which actually ex-
isled. Such an instance very rarely occurs of
deelarations so made good by the actual exis-
tence of facts, aa that which is furnished by
this case. — ^Then, gentlemen, this comes at
last simply tn the question of intention. I
before mentioned that I had some observa-
tions to make to you about our not calling
the captains. Gentlemen, it is perhaps one'
misfortune, if I dare to use such a wora with
respect to any provision of the law of my
«ountrv; but it certainlv is a circumstance
|K>ssibly to be occasionally regretted that the
law has ordained that the prosecutor shall not
add to the list of witnesses which he has de-
livered to the prisoner. I am therefore
itound, in the discharge >f the duties of my
c&ct^ to determine between the difficulty of
ir^ring jpersons upon such evidence as I can
bring mrward, or the delayioe a trial without
apofisibiUty4»fdelenniningwnen I shd be
able to bring forward more evidence^-— I add,
fleotWmcn, that in this case of high treason,
1 meant most studiously to abstain in opening
iip^^nd I hope my loid will go along with me

in thinking that I have not foiled of my ptu-*
pose — most studiously to abstain from stating
to you the substance of any conversa^ns, or
declarations, or language, seditious or not se-
ditious, which this prisoner might liave used
when he was abroad, or when I could have
placed him in other situations, if they had not
a direct application to the subject now before
you, and aid not amount to declarations upon
the very point now before you. — Perhaps,
eeatleraen, I did the prisoner no injustice ia
that respect. I might have known — I do not
inform you whether I did or not— I might
have known that I could have called a wit-
ness to prove the fact of the prisoner's singing
thatsoneof "Plant, plant the tree," some
part of wnich has a very strong application
certainly to a general purpose, hostile to the
existence of kings — it is, to state it altogether,
the most complete epitome of anarchy that I
ever saw in my life. You will observe, if you
cast your eyes over it, that it contains, in the
shape of a song, the averment of an overt act
of every species of treason known to the lav
of Eneland. I did not wish originally to
bring mrward such facts as these ; I thought
it not otherwise than fair, as between the
country and the prisoner, to abstain from do-
ing so. — I kiJOw that there are individuals in
the country, wlio may blame me for not
pressing prisoners up to the extent, in which
they may wish that I should do so. I am
satisfied, upon reflection, and I have formed
my own determination upon that sul^ect, that
a lenient administration of the law, is the
wholesome and salutary administration of the
law : it is that which is congenial to the cha-
r^icter of Britons ; aad I am persuaded that a
miscarriau^ of .justice by lenity, will never
4leeply anoct the administration of justice ia
the country* On this account, I did not
choose originally to bring forward such evi-
dence ; but when captain Collins was called,
and when I was willing to give credit on be-
half of the prisoner to. this extent— that you
should believe that every man, whom I either
did not call, or could not call, had nothing to
say but what was favourable towards the pri-
soner ; when captain Collins was to be broi^ht
forward tp give such an account of the de-
meanour of the prisoner abroad, as I was
taught to exp^ti, from what had been opened,
he would have given» it was my duty to ask
Mr. Cl?v0rton, when he had mentioned the
circumstance of the republican songs (for I
would not originally have introduced it) whe-
ther that song was not sung by the prisoner.
It is now become part of the evidence; it is a
declaration in evidisnce of the general senti-
ments of the prisoner, if vou tbmk he enter-
tained the sentiments that song expresses;
and I say that that song amounts to distinct
evidpnco that the writer of it, or he who adopts
its sentiments (to what ej^tsnt this prisoner
adopted them, is for you to determine, and not
for me to decide) is a man not only not friend^
to the constitution of bis country, or to th^

189]

for High Treason,

A. D. 1796.

[190

being of a king, but capable of proceedtog to
any extent in overturning every estabnsb-
raeot, civil, and religious, in the coontry. I
think it my duty, hwever, on the other band,
to say to you, with respect to all persons not
produced, who either conld be produced be-
fore I delivered my list of witnesses, or could
not be produced because I had delivered my
list, you must do the justice to the prisoner
to persuade yoursehres, that no one of them
could have said any thing, other than favour-
able to him.

But, gentlemen, when that is done, it is for
you to decide this great case. The direction,
which you may receive here, in matter of law
and as to the sufficieticy of the evidence, if
wrong, may be correctea It is the boast and
dory of the constitution of England, that we
do not in thts country ])rbceea upon those
foolish theories of perraction, which are not
made for man. The eonstitotion of England
is founded upon principles which regard those
who are to Irve under it, as being but men. —
There are no parts of our institutions, in
which we do not acknowledge the InBrmity
of the wisest, and the highest, — and best of
those who ma]r be called to administer them
— Id the administration of justice, prosecutors
andjuries, we acknowledge, may err; and it
is perhaps the highest commendation that
can be stated of those sitting above me, that
they are always anxious to set right tne ef-
fect of their mistakes, and are never influ-
enced, in the execution of their duty, b^ a
^se pride to be unwilling to see, or, seemg,
to correct their errors. — I have said here,
that you have a clear case before you. You
will have the judge's direction in law: if you
are satisfied by that direction, as to the mat-
ter of law — if you are convinced by it, that
the evidence offered is competent and legal
evidence, to be offered as proof, I must then,
gentlemen (I am saying this in circumstances
that distress me ; but I am bound to do m^
duty firmly to my country, however painfiil it
may be to myself), I must then call upon you
to lay your hands upon your hearts, and either
to say that the prisoner is guilt^r, or that these
sailors, who come from Brest with the inform-
ation which they have given you, are, every
one of them, peijured.

Gentlemen, the law of this country, in its
benignity, wishes every prisoner a good de-
liverance : it is the humane language of the
law — after he has pleaded, it says to him,
God send you a good deliverance. — My prayer
is, that you may be able to find in .this evi-
dence, tnat which will justify you to God and
your country in acmiitting the prisoner ; but,
if you cannot find that in the evidence, it is
likewise ray duty to my country and to every
individual who Fives in it, to entreat that you
will most seriously recollect in what a situa-
tion of peril, danger and hazard, iricapable of
being described, yon place the country, and
the sovereign of it, if the case be such as
ought to satisfy your consciences, and^ being

such, you should hesitate about pronouncing
the verdict of the law ! may God direct you
in the executk>n of this duty ! I am sure the
country will be satisfied tnat you mean to
execute it with integrity; and, feeline that
confidence, I shall rest upon your conciusiont
with the most perfect satisfaction.

Mr. Adam, — My lord, my learned friend
Mr. Gurney desires me to state one circum-
stance that he omitted to mention, which ao-
counts for Mr. Crossfield's knowledge of this
supposed conspiracy to assassinate the king
by the means of an air-gun and a poisoned
arrow — that immediately upon the apprehenn
sion of Smith, Higgins, and Le Maitre, all the
circumstances to which Upton had deposed
were published in the newspapers.

Mr. Att&mey*GeneraL — I oo not know tho
fact ; but it is very probable. ^

Mr. Justice Orose, — I dare say they were.

SUMMIKO-UP.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre.— ^Gentlemen of
the jury,— This prisoner, Rol>ert Thomaa
Crossfield, stands indicted, together with
three other persons who are not now irpoA
their trials ; namely, Paul Thomas Le MaUre
John Smith, and George Higgins, for that
they did maliciously and traitorously compass,
imagine, and intend to bring and put our so*
vereign lord the king to death. — ^This indict
ment states, as by law it must do, those lea<l-
ing facts which are the evidence of that conK
passing and imagining, and in the language
of the TawarecsJled the overt acts: that tiy
the acts by which the secret intention is made
manifest. Those acts are required to be proved
by two witnesses ; t. e. by two witnesses to
some one overt act, or by one witness to one
overt act, and another witness to another
overt act of the same species of treason.

The different acts which are charged upoft
this prisoner, and the other prisoners, froift
whence this charge of high treason is deduced
are, first, that they, together with others^
cDUspired, combined, consulted, consented^
and agreed to procure, make, and provide, and
cause to be procured, made, and provide^; a
certain instrumentfor the purpose of discharg-
ing an arrow, and also a certain arrow to be
charged and loaded with poison, with intent
to discharge, and cause to be discharged, the
said arrow so charged and loaded with poison,
from and out of, and by means of the said
instrument, at and against the person of our
lord the kin^, and thereby to kill and put to
death our said lord the king. You will ob-
serve, that this is a special and complicated
description ; the overt act consists of a coii-
sph-acy to prepare an instrument of a partitu-
lar description, and for a particular purpose :
the particular description is, that it should be
an instrument to discharge an arrow, but it Is
not every arrow according to this description,
it is an arrow to be loaded with poison, which
arrow is to be discharged by means of this in-
filrument — this is the first overt act charged
in this indictment.

191]

S6 GEORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thoma$ Crou/leld

tl92

The next OTert act charged is, that these
persons employed and eng^ed one John Hill
to fashion two pieces of wood, to be used as
models for making and forming certain parts
of the said instrument from and out of which
and by means of which, the said arrow was su
intended to be discharged. This overt act does
not go to the whole extent of the former,
for it only charges the persons indicted with
the particular fact of luiving employed Hill to
make two pieces of wood as models for form-
ing parts ot the instrument, but still the in-
strument referred to is the same instrument
as specially described in the former charge,
and the piurpose referred to is the same spe-
cial purpose. It therefore amounts to this ;
that if they did not conspire to form the
whole inltrument with the arrow loaded with
poison, yet that they did employ Hill to make
two pieces of wood as models for a part of
that mstrument which was to be employed in
discharging the poisoned arrow. It also adds
that they cUivered to John Hill a paper with
certain drawings thereon, drawn and designed
as instructions and directions for making such
model.

The next charge is, that they consulted
among themselves and others concerning
their traitorous killinz and putting to death
the king by means of the instrument aforesaid,
and how and where such killhig and putting
to death might be most readily and eflfectually
.accomplished.

• This is so stated because if persons who
conspire the death of the king, and had meant
to do it in this particular way, by procuring
such an instrument to be framed, had only
once consulted how they were to bring it
about, the mere consultation is certainly in
law a eood and sufficient overt act to maintain
the chare of compassing the death of the
king; this you see would rest upon consulta-
tion only.

The next charge is, that they employ
Thomas Upton to assist in malan^ the said
instrument, out of which the said arrow
was so intended to be discharged at and
a^inst the king for the traitorous purpose
. aroresaid ; and Uiat they delivered, and caus-
.ed to be delivered to Upton, a certain paper
with fi^^ures and drawings thereon, orawn
and designed as instructions and directions
for making such instrument, and also certain
pieces, that is to say, two pieces of wood as
models for the maKing and forming .certain
parts of the said instrument.

The next overt act is, that they delivered to
Thomas Upton a certain metal tube to be used
by him in the making and forming the said
instrument, out of which the said arrow was
80 intended to be discharged.

These different overt acts have all of them a
connexion in one respect or another with the
particular instrument especially described in
the first of the overt acts, which was an in-
strument to be used for the purpose of dis-
charging an arrow, which arrow was to be

poisoned. But I suppose those who have the
conduct of this prosecution, aware of the dif-
ficulty that there might be in proving that in-
strument in the precise form in which they
have there stated it, and also that it was to
operate by means of an arrow to be poisoned,'
have, in the subsequent overt acts, very much
narrowed the description, and they have
therefore contented themselves with stating,
that these persons did conspire together to
procure an instrument to be made, not saying
of what kind, nor describing its operation, but
an instrument to be made for the purpose of
killing and nutting to death the king, and
they then follow that up with overt acts si-
milar to those already stated, only referring to
the instrument as described in this latter part
of the indictment. In substance there are
therefore two distinct charges, one a charge
of their having been concerned in consulting
about framing, and in framing either the
whole or parts of the instrument specially dc«
scribed for tlie purpose of throwing a poisoned
arrow, the other that they have been con-
cerned in procuring an instrument, though
perhaps not for the purpose of throwing a
poisoned arrow, yet intended and calculated
in some manner to procure the death of the
king.

Gentlemen, this is t|ie substance of the in-
dictment, and the evidence on both sides has
been laid before you, and it is a satisfaction to
me to find that no question of law can pos-
sibly arise in the case, except it be a question
whether there are or are not two sufixcient
witnesses to the overt acts charged, for as to
the charge of compassing the death of the
king, it IS perfectly well understood; and
what are and what are not overt acts of that
charge, are also well understood, and it has
not even been questioned whether any one of
these overt acts, if proved, would be a suffi-
cient overt act of that charge of conspiring
the death of the king ; they are indeed all of
them acts directly and immediately conducing
to the purpose of an attack upon the king's
person, to the horrible purpose of deliberate
assassination of our most gracious sovereign.
I have now two duties imposed upon me ; Uie
first is, to recapitulate tne evidence as cor-
rectly as I have been able to take it ; the next
is to point out to you for your assistance the
application of that evidence to all, or to any
of those overt acts, some or one of which
must be proved in order to constitute proof of
this indictment

Th^ first witness called on the part of the
prosecution was John Dowdine; he said,
that in September 1794, he worked with a
Mr. Penton, a brass-founder, No. tiS, New-
street-square ; that on the 8th of September,
he was called into the oountiue-house; there
he found three men, one of whom was lame,
and whom he has since found to be one
Upton; they asked the witness whether he
could make them a tube ? he inquired what
sort of a tube ? they said it was to be three

193]

Jbr High Treason*

A. D. 1796.

[194

feet bog, five-eights of aA inch in the inside
bofe^ deveoHBighths the outside, and one-
eighth of an inch thick: they said it must be
otiite perfect, and quite a smooth cylinder in
liie inside ; and they asked what the prire of
it would be? be told them he could not tell :
they asked if he could teU them within a few
ahillincsP he said no, he could not: he
slKnved them a piece of a cylinder, they said
that would do provided it was thicker ,.and by
being thicker it would be smaller in the bore:
the witness said he must make a tool on pur-
pose if they wanted to have it quite perfect in
the insidoy and be could not answer for what
the expense would be; if they would tell
him the use of it he should be better able to
jadge how to make it, and would make it
nluch better for their use: the answer was
from Upton, he said that that was a secret ;
bvt he said that the other persons seemed to
join in what Upton then said ; he said he did
not undertake the job ; he told them that he
was bus^, aud it was not worth while to un-
dertake it : he said they then produced a tube
which the^ had before nought at his master's
ahop, which they returned, and took- the
money back, a snudi sum, I think about ei^t-
pence or ten-pence.

He was aslced upon his cross-examination
as to his knowledge of the other two persons,
be said he had never seen them before ; that
they iill stayed in the place while he was
tallung with them ; that there were women
lackenng brass in another room, but he
does not know that any one .of them went
out to speak to those women ; and there is
BO evidence of any thine of that sort ; he said
he could not charge his memory with any
thing particular that was said by the other
men.

. The next witness, Joseph Flint, is a brass-
Ibuader, in Cock-lane, Snow-hill; he said,
that on some day in the month of September,
but he Qould not fix the day, after dinner, he
was called down by his apprentice, and he
found three persons present, one of whom
was lame, he observea he limped as he went
out : they asked for a long pistol barrel ; he
produced them a musquetoon barrel, but they
said that would not do : they did not want it
plugged tip at one end ; he told them he sup-
posed they wanted a strait cylinder ; tl&ey said
they did, that they wanted it to be five-eighths
of anincli diameter in the bore,and one-eighth
of an inch thick; they said if he; would cast
and bore it, they would finish it themselves :
he told them he should not undertake it un-
less they brought him a pattern ? one of them
asked whether a rocket case woul<} no.t do ; he
said it would, provided the ends were plugged
up ; he said .at that time the length oi the.
instroment was not mentioned : one of them
asked the witness how long he would be making
it ? he answered about three da^s. U e said t he
lame man seemed to be tiie principal, but that
he was not the man. who asked in what time
it might be finished, therefore one of the other

VOL. XXVX.

men must of course have asked that question.
He said, in September 1795, he saw Upton,
but be could not take upon himself to say
whether that was the lame man he saw at his
house.

The next witness is James Bland, k brass-
founder, in Shoe-lane, Fleet-street; he said,
that in the month of September 1794, but he
could not fix the day, two men came into his
shop, that in about five minutes after they
were gone out, a third came in, and asked
where those two men were gone ? the witness
showed him which way they went, and that
man followed them : he said that when those
two persons were in the shop, they asked him
for a tube, or a barrel ; he told them if they
wanted a barrel they must apply to the watch-
makers, if they wanted a tube to the drawers ;
he said that they went away, and then it was
that the man came in and asked for the two
gentlemen, and followed them ; he said that
the third person he believes was Palmer ; he
told them they were gone down the lane, and
he went that way ; he did not then know Pal-
mer ; he saw Palmer since before the privy
council, and he said one of the others was a
lame man.

. The next witness 1$ David Cuthbert, who
lives at No. 9, Greyhound-court, Arundel-
street; he is a mathematical- instrument-
maker ; he said he knew Upton, he had called
upon Upton to subscribe to the relief of the
virives and children of persons in custody some
time ago for high treason ; that he had no me-
mory of what had passed at that time. The se-
cond time he called to know how the subscrip-
tiofx went on, and they had some conversation
about the Corresponding Society . Upton, he
said^ was a watch-maker, and he gave him
an invitation to come and see an engine of
his, which was an air-pump and an air-gun ;
he siaid he explained them to Upton ; that
Upton came again next day with another per-
son ; he said Upton had displeased him with
the turn of his conversation, and he did not
like him nor his acquaintance. The other
person talked of hein^ fond of shooting, said
ne had met with an injury by the explosion of a
gun, and had lost three fingers, but the witness
said he did not look to see whether that was
so or not, and there is not in the evidence any
thing which has served to apply that circum-
stance to cither this prisoner, or to any other
I person; he said that man handled the gun r
Upton asked the witness whether he wanted
a job ; he said he had more business than he
could do : he said he had no conversation with
the other about the properties of the ai»guir,
and never saw that man since; he said he
should not have known him if he had met him
at the end of six hours ; he does not know
that he should have known him if he had met
him a minute after, but he took him to be a
much taller man than the man he afterwards
saw at the privy council; that Upton, in his
jud2ment,did not appear to be then acquainted
witn the properties of; air,

Q

195]

S6 GEORGE m.

Trial qfRabirt Thomas CronfiM

[195

The next witness is Peregririe Palmer ; be
describes himself to be an attorney, in Bar-
nard's-inn; he said he has been acquainted
with the prisoner sixteen years, tha>t b^ was a
physician ; that he had resided in a number
of places durins his acquaintance with him ;
that the last p&ce he knew him to iodg.e at
was Dyer's- buildings ; that they were upon
terms of great intimacy, and were both mem-
l)ers of the Corresponding Society; he had
seen him there, and believed he was a mem-
ber—the witness himself was a delegate and
chairman of a committee ; he said he might
have seen Crossiield there three or four or
five times, that they were of the same divi-
sion; he said he knew Upton ; that in the
beginning of September 1794, he accom-
panied the prisoner, Cross^eid, to Upton's ;
ne said that they all went together afterwards
to a house ip New-street, or New* street-
SQuare, which h^ thinks was a brass-founder's
what passed there he does not know ; Upton
appeared to him to have some business with
the brass-ibunder ; they were there but a few
minutes, but he can recpUect nothing ; as to
himself he said there was nothing transacted
by him, that it was Upton's business ; he said
that he had not the least recollection of what
pt^ed; he ^d he would no^ swear that no-
thing was prodqced to that man, but he does
nut know that there was ; that from thence
they went to another brass-founder's in Shoe-
lane ; he himself did not go into that house at
first, they were in the house a minute or two
before him ; he weqt in to inquire after them,
they were gone ; he overtook them in the
same street, and then they went to Cock-lane,
to a person in the same Hne of business;
they all thre^ went into that house, and some
directions were given by Upton about some-
thing in the way of Upton's business ; he said
he had no recollection of any thing that was
said about a brass tube or a model, but that
there might be such a conversation ; that he
does not recollect bavins the tube shown to
Inm at the privy council; that he had seen
Crossfield's writmg, but could not say whe-
^er cei[tain papers produced were of his
nand-writiag ; he does not take upon himself
to swear that tb^ were ; on the contrarv, he
says he is not sumciently acauainted with the
hand-writing to form any belief upon the sub-
ject; he saia some papers were shown him at
the privy council, he does not recollect that
ever he saw them before; he said they were
but a few minutes in Cock-lane, he recollects
nothing that passed ; he said they, went afler-
wards to Dill's, a turner, in Bartholomew-
dose, he recollects Upton's giving some in-
struction^ to Hill, something: of a model or a
pattern was mentioned, and be thinks he pro-
duced a drawing as instructions for something
that Hill was to do, but he cannot say whe-
tber It was lefl or not; he said he thinks that
y pton niade it at the time in the house ; he
has no recollection of any brass tube being
produced there; he said he thought they

parted somewhere thereabouts, and that the
meeting with Upton was accidental ; he said
Upton hved in Bell-yard, that he might have
seen Crossfield once or twice at Upton's be«
fore that ; the prisoner at that time lived in
Dyer's buildings, and lived there at the timo
when Upton's informaUoB was given; ht
said that he and Crossfield went together soon
afterward to Bristol , that it was many months
before the proclamation was issued for appre-
hending Crossfield, he thinks it was in the
month of October 1^94; he said the prisoner
had a wife, but he believes she did not reside
with him in DyerVbuildinzs ; he said he left
the prisoner at Bristol, as he understood he
had some idea of settUng there; that he
came back to London again about the time
of the witnesses being examined before the
privy council ; that be did not then lodge in
Dyer's-buiidings, nor does he know where he
did lodge; he thought he received one letter
from him from Bristol, but did not believe
he had written to CrosiAeld there ; he said he
might see Crossfield afler his return twaor
three times at his own chambers ; he after
that saw him no more till he saw him under
examination at the |»ivy council; he said
Crossfield was much in the habit of coming
to his chambers; thev were upon terms of
great intimacy ; Crossfield was in an ill state
of health at that time, and was forced to take
large quantities of opium ; that Crossfield was
acquainted with Upton ; he thought Cross-
field became acquainted with Upton by seeins
him at the Corresponding Society ; he said
he saw an electrical machine at Upton's
shop; he said Upton became disgraced in
tliat society, that Le Maitre^ one of the per'-
sons now charged hi this indictment, was
particularly offended with him; he said he
had attencled the society in August and Sep-
tember 1794; he then stated the occasioB of
Upton and himself and Crossfield being toge-
ther that day ; he s»d that Upton had a*
watch of his to repair; he thinks he and
Crossfield had dined toother somewhere in
the neighbourhood of Temple-bar, and he
meant to call on Upton for this watch ; he
said he had no particular recollection who it
was that spoke to them in New-street-square
whether it was the master or the servant ;
that his reason for not going into the second
house was, that he hada necessarv occasion
to stop ; he said that he and Crossfield meant
to have gone together into the city, and bap*'
pening to call upon Upton for me watch,
tFpton said he was geioe that way, and wc^ld
accompany them, which was the oecaaion of
their being together that day ; he sud he saw
Crossfield puDlicly about the time of Smith
and Le Maitre being taken into custody; that
he and Crossfield went soon after that to
Bristol, that Crossfield had an intention- three
or four months before to go to Bristol, that
he mbant to anafyse the waters, and if he
found any success he thought of settUng
there; that he saw him eveiyday wlnlehe*

idT]

Jor High TreOion.

A. D. 1796.

flSB

tt^tid at Bristol^ and that he appeared there
as publicly at he had done any where else ;
he thinks Crossfield leroained at Bristol after
bim two months, and returned to town about
the lime that he, the witness, was examined
before the privy council ; he said, as well as
be recollects, the last time he saw Crossfield,
was on the last day he was before the privy
council, in the month of January ; that the
reward ibr apprrehendmg Crossfield was pub-
lished a considerable time aflertrards; he
said, upon his farther examination, that when
be was first examined before the i^nvy council,
be mentioned his knowing Crossfield, and
Qndertook to the ^my council to endeavour
at least to find Crossneld ; however, he says
SMtwithstanding that he did not produce
Crossfield at the privy council, he thought he
saw bim in the early part of the last day when
be went to the privy council ; that when he
was first examiiMd, he told Crossfield of the
circomstance of his (Crossfield's) attendance
being required at the privy council, and of his
InviBg said be would endeavour to produce
bim, but Crossfield said he was '^oing abroad
as surgeon to a ship, and that his staying in
town might be the means of preventing bis
voyage, and therefore Crossfield did not
dioose to go, and he says he did not men-
tion to the privy comicil his having seen
Crossfield.

The next witness, John Hill, said he was a
member of the Corresponding Society, of Di-
▼isiott No. 0, that he knew Upton a little, and
be knew Palmer ; that Upton, Palmer, and
another man, came to his house in Bartholo-
mew-close, in September 1794 ; Upton asked
bim whether he could turn in wooa ? he said
yes ; be then asked him if he was ready to
do a job for them P he said yes : Upton began
to d^cribe what he wanted ; the witness said
be did not understand him ; that Upton then
gave bim a sketch, he believes the sketch
wbidi is now produced in evidence, and he
tbou^ it was made in his presence, and
upon a piece of paper that belonged to him,
and witn bis pen and ink ; he asked Upton
what it was for ; Upton said it was for some-
tluoig in the decmfying machine way; he
was to take it to Upton's nouse, and he would
see him paid ; he said the stranger did some-
thifig[ towards making that sketch, what it
was in )iarticular he could not recollect, but
be thinla he did something; that it was done
pfincipaUy by Upton's direction ; he said he
does not recollect that Palmer did any thing
to tt; be said a piece was to be made strai^^ht
like a round ruler, and there was sometbmg
to be done from it in brass work ; he said he
carried the models home to Upton's, three
days after; he found him at cards, and deli-
▼ered the models to him ; this he said was
about the middle of September; be said
there were some imnutations upon Upton in
the Corresponding Society ; that Higgins, one
of the persona indicted, iaid something which
aCronied Upton, and thejf w^ about to in-

vestigate Upton^s character, when he chose
to save them the trouble by taking himself
away; that IIi2s;ins said, as he went out,
there he hops on : he said, that after Upton
was apprehended, be one day called upon the
witness ; they were here going to enter into
evidence of some declarations that were made
by Upton, but I thought it not proper to
receive that evidence under those arcom-
stances.

The next witness was John Le Bretton ;
his account is, that he sailed in the Pomona,
a South-Sea whaler, from Falmouth, on the
Southern fishery, round Cape Horn; the pri-
soner came on board a week before tnev
sailed from Portsmouth, which was the S9th
or 30th of Jammry ; that the prisoner was
surseon, and was called the Doctor ; he said
he did not know his name ; they sailed upon
the 18tb of February from Falmouth, and
were taken on the 15th by a French corvette,
and carried into Brest; they arrived there
upon the Sdrd ; he said that when the list
was made out of the prisoners lo be sent on
shore at Brest, the prisoner wrote his name
Robert Thomas Crossfield, and went in the
first number of the prisoners ; that when he
went away, he wished them a good bye, and
said he was happy in going to France, he
would sooner go there than to England; he
afUrwards saw him in the corvette ; he said
he heard the prisoner say he was one of those
who invented the ait^gun to shoot or assassi-
nate his majesty: the witness asked him
what it was likeP the prisoner answered, that
an arrow was to go through a kind of tube by
the force of inflammable air, that he described
it with his finger to be like one of their har-
poons; he said that when this prisoner was
to go home by the cartel, he then gave his
name in H. Wilson ; that he helped to make
out the list, and he put down his own name H.
WiUon: he also described himself in that list
as having been captured in the Hope, and as
being a passenger; he said that there were
twenty- three men belonging to their vessel ;
that Mr. Charles Clarke was the captain, who
likewise came back in the cartel : he was asked
about Clarke ; he said he saw him at Christ-
mas, and he, as well as he recollects, was not
examined before the privy council ; he saw
him afterwards at Mr. White's, and on board
the ship, and at his lodgings in Wapping ; he
sud he once saw him at Mr. Smith's, but
that he did not then lodge there ; that he saw ,
him when he was fitting out his ship, and
mvf have talked with him, but has no recol-
lection of any particular conversation about
Crossfield, excepting that he said he had been
examined at the privy council ; he did not
inform him of the subject of bis examhiation,
and he says he did not ask him whether he
hiid not overheard his conversation with Cross*
field ; that, you see, comes to be material, be-
cause Mrs. Smith has been called for the pri-
soner, in order to fasten a contradiction upon
him with respect to that circumMnee; he

199]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial ofRobiri Thmet CroufiM

[900

said captain Clarke was Dever so iDqubiUve
as to ask him what he had said upon his ex*
amination, nor did be ever tell him ; he said
he had not seen him above two or three
times, and he was now but of England ; he
said that he was frequently in company with
Crossfield at Portsmouth before they sailed ;
he was on shore with him twice on two dif^
ferent evening s the witness said he was boat**
steerer, an officer on board this vessel ; he
went on shore at Portsmouth to buy necessa-
ries, and he said Crossfield appeared there
publicly; he said the ship was loaded
with casks of water and provisions, and
the captain's private trade, and also a
littJb piivatc trade of some of the officers,
what that was he does not take upoa
himself to know; they put into Falmouth
by stress of weather on the Snd of February ;
they sailed again on the ISth; Crossfield was
never on shore at Falmouth, or at most but
once; at first.he said there were only their
ship's crew on board the French ship afier
they were carried into Brest, and that they
were all concerned in a scheme to seize the
French ship, Crossfield and all ; there were
some foreigners, on board who would not agree
to it, and tnercibre the* scheme failed ; they
first went into the roads at Brest ; they had no
concern with any other English prisoners till
they were put on board the prison ship the
Elizabeth ; that Crossfield was one of those
who were put on board her ; he mentioned
two other vessels lying near theAi, Che.
yAcbille and the Normandy ; that Crossfield
spoke French, and sometimes served as an in-
terpreter ; captain Cleverton, the master of
another ship, was on board the prison ship;
be thinks Mr. Cleverton messea with Cross-
field ; there was also a captain Collins there ;
whether he was on board or not he does not
remember; he was afterwards removed from
the Elizabeth to the Peggy ; that the Active
Increase was lashed to them ; that there were
three prison ships lashed together, and that
they were all on board ; Mr. Cleverton was at
the hospital for some time ; that captaip Yel- '
lowly commanded one of the cartels, and he
said he knew that the prisoner's name was
Crossfield, and he made no secret that he knows
of about his name ; he said their private trade
was in a few trunks, some part of it was sold
on board the prison ships, oy the indulgence
of the person who took them : that they per-
mitted the crew to take possession of some
part of the private property. He was asked
whether he had not some words with Cross-
field about it, he said no, and that he never
heard of Crossfield's threatening to inform
the under-writersof this transaction, about the
private trade which was said to have been
in this way embezzled, and which was sup-
posed to be insured. I do not see that any
thing turns upon that; there is no contradi'cr-
tion introduced.

Thomas Dennis, the chief mate of the
Pomona, said, that he sailed in her from

Portsraooth ; that the prisbner sailed on board
that Vessel as surgeon ; that he west by the
name of doctor ; that he did not rightly know
his name tiH he g0t into France ; tnat he bad
never seen the prisoner before he came on
board ; that the night after they sailed from
Falmouth, the prisoner said that if Pitt knew
where he was, he would have sent a frigate
after him ; that Pitt was to have been uiot
going over Westminster Bridge, but hiBd
avoided it by goms another way ; that his m»-
iesty was to have been assassinated by a darl
blown through a tube, and* that he knew bow
the (iart was constructedy and something he
mentioMfiHdiout a harpoon: he said, that
when they were taken by the French, he
shook him by the hand, and said he wished
they might get safe to England, he was hap^
he had got out of England, and was going to
France. This witness mentioned the circum*
stance spoken of b^ the other witness, Jtbat
when the list of prisoners was delivered in at
Brest, he delivered his name R. T. Crossfield, •
and said he had no occasion then to beashamed
of his name. When the list was made out for
the exchange of prisoners, and the prisoners
were to so to Ebgland, he said he cmmeed it
to H. Wilson, and described himself as being
captured in the Hope brig, and this he di^ in>
his own hand ; whea the list was called b w»
he answered to the name of , Wilson, and
walked aft. The witness was afUrwarda cal-
led before . the privy council, in older to give
tbeftii information respectipg *thi^ traiine-
tion. •

tJpoii his cross-exam'iiiatioh, he said, they
got into Brest on the SSnd ; tbst there was a
plan 10 rise; he thinks Crossfield had en-
gaged to be one ; Crossfield was one of those
who messed in the cabin ; and Crossfield and
the rest that were' there were to seise the.
ship ; |ie said thatthere .were three prison sbipa
toother ; the Hope- bri^^ captain Falooner, he
said, had been taken within aday or two after
they were taken, and Mr: Cleverton ' was in
her; he said that som^ of tMr private pro-
perty was sav^d, nothine of his was. insured ;
that captain Ckirke might have something in-
sured;-what were sav^ were sold on boaid
the prison ships; he said he. had no words
with Crossfield on that accotmt, nor aqy
quarrel, nor did they converse much; that
his station was the deck, and the doctor's was
below ; that he h^d- heard Crossfield had said
it was owing to his nesligence that the ship
was taken ; Crossfield had • never said it to
him; he said Crossfield was not removed
from the vessel on account of a quarrel be-
tween him and lie Bretton, and there is no
evidence of any such thin^.. He was asked
about the state of their provisions; he
said tlicy had bad provisions, but- with their
money they could purrhase gopd; he said
there was a scheme for his obtaining his li-
berty, by getting a certificate that be was an
AAieri^an, and which Crossfiekl was incline
to assist him in ; that Cn>at6el4 meant to gtt

SOI]

for Hi^ Trwion*

his liberty by insistitis that be 'was a natu*
ralized liolknder ; and that he wrote to Ley-
den for the purpose of getting the necessary
evidence to support that pretension; he said
Crossfield said he had interest enough in
Prance to procure all of them their liber^ ;
he said Crossfield had a goo^ deal of levity
about hiniy and talked and .ratded a good
^eal.

James Winter described himself to be the
owner of the Susannah, a vessel from New-
foundlaoMl to Spain, on board of which he was
with ins propertv, and was captured and car-
ried into Brest ; he was taken upon the OHi of
I>ecember, and arrived at Brest upon the 13th
and was on board the prison ship for some
time ; that upon the SOtn of Marcn they were
put on boad a cartel in Landemau river ; that
Crossfield came on bpard and dined, this was
on the 9nd or 3rd of April; captain Yellowley
introduced the prisoner by the name of
Crossfield, but the prisoner laushed, and said
that his name was not Crossneld, but Tom
Faiae ; he said that after supper he smig sedi-
tious songs ; then he said tnat he tnd shot at
jbis majesty, bat unluckily had missed him.
At another time the witness asked him where
it was that he had shot at the> king, the pri-
aoner said it was between Buckingham-house
and the Palace ; he said that mis kind of
cofiveraaition na^d every day' for five months
the prisoner aki not say with what weapon he
had shot at him, but said he would show the
witness sonietbing like a pop-gun, about a
foci and a half lone, made of iron ; he 'said he
had put poisoned &rts into this gun, and had
^t at a cat, and the cat ez[Hred in great
a^nies in a short time ; that he sud it wouM
kiHamanat thirty yards distance, lind no-
body could see that he had done it; that he
repeated these kind of things fifty times ; the
witness said there were nme of 'them that
dhoed together ; that this sort of conversation
freauentPjr happened :. that the prisoner shew-
ed nhn in what manner this anow was-made ;
he said that whcfnthe arrow struck the part it
was aimed at,, the poison would eome *out- of
the dart ; that Crossfield said he was the per-
son who ordered the poison to be made up,
ao4 that he ^t it at a ebymisVs shop ;. that
Crossfield said he had fired at* his majesty,
but did not say with the dart, but it was
damned utilucky he had missed his aim ; he
a^ jx>body was present when he showed the
witness in what manner this arrow was to act,
that it .was in a private conversation between
them'; but he said once in August, afterwards
be corrected himself to July, - Crossfield said
be hoped he should live to see the day when
the blood should be over his ancles in the
streets of Xohdon, of the king and his party ;
a gentleman present said ^od forbid, matters
may be done .more easy. Then the witness
went baffiJfi again to what he had stated before
and said, that heweat to- the chymist's him-
selfi a«d ordered .the f»Qison to -be made up,
and with that he had killed the cat : he said

A. i), 1796. [802

Crossfield sud that after* he had shot at his
nHdesty, he was oblised to make off to Ports*
mouth, where he had got on board a ^uth-
Sea man ; that two of uie king's messengers
were after him ; the witness said that captain
Collins wished to have the cutting off the kin?
and Pitt^ and the parliament; that Crossfield
said have patience, I hope to have the cuttiBe
off some of them myselt by and by; he saia
that on the 37th of Ai^st, when the cartel
left Brest, Crossfield said every thing is now
settled to my satisfaction ; one of the
captains endeavoured to stop his mouth,
and prevent him from talking but ho said
the French had given him great encourage-
ment; that from the 18th or 19tb,' down to
that time, the prisoner had been very close;
he SMd they, were three days on their passage*
and they landed at Mevaeissey; that nothing
passed in the course of the passage material.
The witness went immediately to a justke of
peace, and gave information ; upon that in*
formation, be said a warrailt was granted, bat
before the warrant could be executed the yea-^
sel was gone to Fowey, and there it was the
prisoner was apprehended.

Upon his cross-examinatibn he said, thai.'
he 'was fifty-nine years of age ; thai he had
resided at Newfoundland; that they were
part of the time on board the Berwick,.captain
Alexander, tine of them he mentioned, the two
Byrons, Collins, and several others tint came
over in the cairtel; hevaid he told the justice
the names of those persons^ and that they
were of the.society of Crossfield; he menti-
oned their landing at Fowey; he said
Crossfield was ap^to drink ; that the company
that used to mess with them must nave
known of the general conversation, but thcd
he does not think that they knew any thing
about the mention that was made of the dait»
because that was in private. He .was then
asked whether he himself had not told a stbry
of a hare, apd he gave us sotne particulars of
that story; and that certainly raises aqonside-
mble degree of doubt whether thb man is
perfectly and entirely.to be depended upen, .
in respect to his eapaci^^ the story was cer-
tainly a fpohsb one, though not abaoUitely
impossible, to be true ;. but he -added to it,
that (theiJB was a notion that the phice was
troubled, which. leads to a suspicion that. he
himself cbnceived there was something su-
pernatural iix the event Mfhicly he related.
This would be a strone mark of sl distempered
imagination. You will recollect that' a wit-
ness for the prisoner said, that Winter de-
clared that the hare was a witch or a devil in
the shape of a hare. Tha[t which dropped
froVn this man himself, in the course of his
evidence, conpemine the plaec being troubled,
connects very closely with what the- witness
related; and the . whole, tak^n together,
marks so strongly that this man's mind; is not
perfectly compo^d, that itmust weigh against
the credit of his testimony, even though there
shd^d be no reason to doubt l>ut that be

1203] 86 G£ORQ£ IIL

Trial o/Roh^rl Thomoi CrdUfietd

[904

Bi€aDS ia speak the, truth. Thb mitn has
given very material evidence against ttle pri-
soner; but it can hardly be thought, having
this cloud thrown over it, a sufficient foun-
dation for a verdict in this important cause,
between tbo king and the prisoner at the
bar.

Richard Penny, the next witness, describes
himself to be Hiaster at arms of the Daphne ;
be said that veseel was taken by the French,
and he was put on board the Elisabeth ; he
said he hearo Crossfield singing in his bed a
song which occasioned his asking him some

Suestiotisth^ next looming, as th^ song wished
amnatton to a king; he asked him what
king he meant; Crossfield said thekin^of
En^Bflid ( uDon his remonstrating with him,
CrMsfield threatened to have him put in
irons, and then he said he was one of the
three that attempted to blow a dart at his
ttrnjesty, in Covent-garden ; that Tom
Pame*s works were what he would be go-
verned by, and that if ever he arrived in Eng^
land, he would attempt the like again : he
said that when they were codaing into Meva-
gissey, the prisoner said to him, young man,
wer6 not you on board the Elizabeth, he an-
swered that he was; the prisoner then -de-
sired that he would take no notice of what
was said 6n board the Elizabeth ; the witness
said he mentioned it at Portsmouth, in coi>-
sequence of which he was sent to Plymouth,
wlvere he made an inibrmation ; he [said they
were captui^d upon the SSnd of September,
1794 ; that Crossfield came on board in the
liionth of March, and remained About d month
aboard ; that he messed with Dennii, captain
Clarke, and others ; that the mess consisted
of seven; he said he recollects that on
board the Elizabeth, Crossfield was dnee
in close conference with the French officer.

The next witness is Walter Colmer ; he is
a person who was employed to appr^end
this prisoner, and to convey him from on
board the cartel at Fowey to Bodmin gaol ;
he said the prisoner was put into a ppat
chaise, with another constable to attend him,
and he swears thai! upon the road the prisoner
told him that be would give him and bis
partner each a ghinea to let him go, that they
woiHd only get a few shillings ibr carrving
him to Bodmin ; afVer that he offered tKem
two guineas each ; one asked him what they
should do with the driver, the prisoder said if
they would let him have one of their pistols
he would soon settle that matter ; he was
asked ithether the prisoner was not hi liquor,
lie said that he might be a little in liquor^ but
be did not think be was much.

[The Chief justice bemg reminded by Mr.
Gomey, that Colmer said, that when he asked
far the prisoner, he answered to the name of
Cfosafield, added,] I *boald have stated tcryon
that Colmer, ia part (tf his evidence, said
that the prisoner, whoa be was afmiehmed,
attwerett to the name of CroMieid

Uifttetk Uitton ft dteovilMid to be tiitf wife

of one Thomas Upton; she gave an account
of having missed her husband from the liSnd
of February last, when he went out; she said
she never saw him afterwards, but that his
hat was brousht home by a waterman ; she
said he gave tier a seal before he went out,
and she behoves, having heard nothing of
him,thathe is not new alive; she said that he
was a sober man, she never saw him dis-
guised in liquor; she kn<{w Crossfidd, she
had seen him at her husband's house fre*
quently ; and also Palmer, she has seen him
there m company with Crossfield ; she said
sholhought she reooUeeted having seen the
two models, which are now prodiMed, lyins
in her husband's shop, at the House in Bellh.
yard; she said she had known Hill; that
something like those models were brought
home by Hill one night; but she has no re-
collection of havinc ever seen a tube, whidi
was now shown to her, nor the paper which
has been produced : she now lives in Oiay'a
Inn-lane.

George Steers lives in Oatwood's Building^
Hill-street, Finsbury-square ; he sud he hap-
pened once, though not a member of the Cor-
responding society to be at one of their meet-
ings in the latter end of the year 1794, somc^
where about the month of August, there he
saw Upton, he observed Upton was lame : he
observed that he held something in his hand,
at first he thought it was a waiking-stick, but
it turned out to be no walking stick ; there was
a fellow cleric along with him ; he asked H|^
Ion whatit was. he did not give any answer ;
he asked for what purpose it was intended ;
Upton showed it him in his hand, he then
perceived by the light that it was made of
brass ; that the tnbe which is now produced,
is in appearance the same, hot he cannot un-
dertake to say it is the same.

William Henry Pusey said he i#as with the
last witness at this meeting of the Corres-
ponding Society; that Upton #a8 there;
ne saw under his coat something which re-
sembled that tube whidi i^ now produced ; he
asked Upton whatit was; Upton palled it
farther out, but{gave no answer, only shook hia
head ; that the thing when producedi did not
appear to him to be solid.

Edward Stocker, the other eonslaible, who
was not called immediately after the fiitt,
said that as they were conveving the priaoner
to Bodmin gaol, he offered them a*gmiiea
a-piece, and afterwards two suineas a*pieoe,
to let mm go, and said it vras better to let Um
go than to take a Httle money to tarty him
to gaol, and that he was voan enough for both
of them, by which I suppose he meant that
the vritness might make that excuse, fhat
he had got awav from them by superior
force ; Colmer asked him what th^ were to
do with the driver, be answered, if you will
give me one of y<Hir pbtols Fll pop at him,
and settle the matter; that he ccuM give
them a draft on some person at Fowev ; the
witoesa aakad wlwiher tM knvfr any iiiteU-

IQS]

Jt^ High Treoion.

A. D. 1796.

[205

tent of Fovey, he said no, he did not know
any iobahitanty hut it was a person in Fowey,
woo would answer bis drai\ ; he cannot say
that the prisoner appeared to him to be in
liquoTybut that he aTterwards did fall asleep,
and slept soundly a great part of the way ; that
they set out about nine o'clock in the
evening.

Harvey WalklaSe Mortimer is then called ;
he is a gun-smith in Fleet-street, aad has
been near thirty years in the business ; he has
been used to the eonstruction of air-guns : he
has freauently constructed them in the form
of a walking-stick ; he says they will not take
efiect entirely without explosion, but in tbe
open air ; when the air has a free current you
cannot hear it ; in a room it makes a noise,
like tbe dapping of a hand ; that in a theatre
k would make less noise than in a small
room; that it has so little recoil, that if
you were to hold it before your eye with a
class between you would not perceive that it
hint tbe glass^ and he said a very accurate
aim may be taken ; he said tbe tube of an
air-gun might be so constructed as to dis-
charge an arrow. A drawing is produced to
him of two arrows, one barb^, the other not ;
he said the barbed arrow might be so con-
structed, that the barbs might collapse, and
so be put into this tube, and when forced out
agnn, they would regain their position ; the
springs most be wrak, but they would act
upon a joiut, and, being made weak, they
mieht be pressed in ; he says undoubtedly
sudi an arrow might occasion death ; he is
shown those two pieces of wood ; he said that
they certainly might make a <^linder, in the
Ibnn of the k>ngest of those pieces ; that the
small end of the models mark the size of the
bore, and that if this was designed for a
niston to sondense the air, it would be to
oe put on occasionally upon tbe air-gun, and
be says that they might condense the air suf-
ficiently to charge a brass tube with con-
densed air, so as to discharge an arrow three
or four times without re-charging it ; he was
asked to look at the paper, and see whether
he could take upon himself to say, that the
models were made from the drawings in that
paper ; be said he could not take upon him-
self to say, from tbe appearance of the paper,
tbat they were made from those drawines,
ibat without something having been said, he
should not have known for what that paper
was intended^ or what it was to represent ; he
said that they make now their atr-euns in a
seater form than this, in the form of a walk-
ing-stick; that the recipioit for condensed
air may be within the tube, uid the con-
denser either within or without. He was
sisked as to the possibility of some matter
beine enclosed in the barb of the arrow, and
which, though the avow was discharged.
n^ght not be lost till it struck the ol^jeict, and
then it wouki part with that matter ; he said,
be believes that an arrow might be so con-
strueled^ be wsnt into a more particular de-

scription of his air-gun, which I do not think
extremely material, and I did not encourage
him to go farther into it, because 1 did not
wish it should be veryparticularly taken down
to inform the world dt that which it is better
the world should not know ; but he said that
which is material to tbe subject of our in-*
quiry, which is, that upon looking at these
models, he does believe that they are models
of part of an air-gun ; he said that if he had
not seen them along with the tube, he should
not have been so well satisfied, but that it is
very satisfactory to him, seeii\g them along
with the tube, that that was the purpose for
which thev were constructed, but that with-
out the tube it would be his belief that they
were intended as parts of an air-gun. That^
you see, is very material, because tbe very
point of the overt act is, that these were
models of part of the instnimeot, which might
be used for the purpose expressed in the overt
act, namely, to destroy the king.

Mr. Ward was then call^ ; he said that
upon the 19th of September, 1794, he saw
the paper which has been produced, which
has a n^rc of a barbed arrow upon it, in the
possession of Upton, at Upton's own house ;
and he thinks he saw likewise the other
paper, but he did not see the tube. On the
Saturday, which was the next day, he went to*
give information of it; and he saw Mr. Pitt
upon the Wednesday following, when the in*
formation was given.

Mr. Palmer being again brought u]) to be
asked a Question that was omitted, said that
Crossfielas circumstances were bad ; that hia

Kroperty had been assigned for the benefit o^
is creditors.

Grientlemen, this is the evidence on the parl^
of the prosecution.

On the part of the prisoner James Parkin-
son was the first witness called, who describedf
himself to be a surgeon and apothecary in
Hoxton-square ; be said that in August 1794,^
he was a member of the Corresponding So-
ciety ; that Higeinsand Smith were members;
of the general committee; that encjuines
were instituted in the committee by H>ggin»
and Smith at the request of the committee of
Correspondence, into the character of Upton^
upon a charge of baving set his house on fire ;:
that there was a meeting^ at which Upton was
present ; I think this was all that he said
upon his original examination.

Upon hiscross-examination, he was asked
whether he had not been at some time in*
possession of a paper intitled La Guillotine, or
George*s Head m the Basket ; he said he had
such a paper, but that he did not'receive it in
the society ; he said he had heard that Le
Maitre and Upton were reconciled ; he said
that he did zo to Hill aAer tliese people were
apprehended^ to hear all that be could collect,
in order to give tbe privy council all the in-
formation he could; that he never heard of
any quarrel between Upton and Crossfield,'
and that*Hill expressed- uneasiness abouf
having turned these models.

J07]

86 GEORGE III.

Trial oJSUAeH Thomas CrptsJUld

[208

The next witness was John Bone, who
lives fX No. 8, Weston-streei, Southwark, a
muslin clearer ; he said he was a memher of
the Corresponding Society in the raontlis of
August and September 1794, and a member
of Uie general committee; that Le Maitre,
Smith, and Higgins were members; and that
there were disputes between them and Upton
some time after the commencement of Au-
gust; that they originated in Upton's bad
chamcter; that Higgins and Le Maitre were
taken i^up upon the 2tth or the S8th of Sep-
tember : tnat Smith and Hiegins had at-
tacked Upton's character, and there was a
freat dispu^ with considerable violence,
ptween Le Maitre and Upton, he believes
that was on the 4th of September ; that it
threw the whole assembly into great agita-
. tion ; that a letter had been sent in, reflectipg
highly upon the society ; that when it was
known th^t it was written by Upton, and he
confessed it, Le Maitre was very severe upon
bim ; that he called him a man, considering
him as unworthy the name of a citizen ; he
^id that Upton threatened to be revenged of
Le Maitre ; that Le Maitre said to him. if he
bad any thins to settle, it would be better to
do it at another time, and he gave him his
address ; the same evening Higgins moved,
iatheEencral committee, a vote of censure
upon Upton, which was discussed, and Upton
going towards the door, Higgins said that if
they meant to do any thing upon the vote of
censure tliev must be quidc, for that he was
boppipg oft'* this put Upton into a great rage,
and he called Hij^gins a wretch, for reflecting
upon his natural mfirmity ; that Higgins made
answer, perhaps I ought to tell you you lie,
but it shall sumce at present to say I did not
mean ic so ; Smith said if Upton's name was
kept in the printed list of the Society his
name should not continue there ; and that
the night before these people were a|ipre-
bended the list was ordered to be published
ivithout Uplon's name.

John Huttley, a watch-sprinc maker, in
Great Sutton- street, ClerkenwelCsaid he saw
Upton in September 1794; that their conver-
sation turned upon Higgins, Le Maitre, and
Smith having been apprehended. Upton said
it was their own fault, they had made free
with his character. •

William Brown said he knew Upton ; that
in September 1795, he asked him concerning
what Crossfield was detained for, Upton said
be could not tell ; he asked if he knew what
was the chief accusation against him, Upton
said he did not know ; he asked him if he
knew Le Maitre, Hicgins, and Smith, Upton
said yes, too well, they were three damned
villains, and had used him in the roost vil-
Liinous manner; that they still continued to
hurt his chaVacter, and that they had attacked
him in the street calling him an informer,
and brought a mob about him, and that if
they did not desist, he should certainly use
some means; he told Upton that he must

t

make some i^Uowance, considering the ill
usage be had given them, by layine against
them an accusation apparently unTound«d ;
Upton said he was unacquainted with the'
former part of the story, and that he would
relate the whole; that prior to all this busi*
ne^s there had been a subscription.fof the &-
mi lies of the state prisoners ; that subscrip-
tions were received at his bouse 'as well as at
others ; that Higgins, Le Maitre, and Smith
had accused him of bein^ a thief, and an in*
cendiar^; that the society had refused to
give him a fair trial upon it, and that they
still continued abusing him in every pubiic'
company ; the witness told him such accusa*
tions as those, in his judgment, could not arise-
from nothihs at all ; that Upton then said he
would 4ell bim what it alluded to ; he had
once a house in Cold Bath Fields, which was
burnt down ; he was advertised, and a reward
offered for apprehending him ; that he agreed .
with a friend of his, that his friend should
produce him, that they might get the rtfward,
and when thev had got the reward the Phcs-.
nix Office could make nothing against hi^,
and he appealed to the witness whether, as
be was acquitted in the eye of the law, an^
man ou^ht publicly t6 accuse bim. •All this
goes but a little way, because there is nothing
that points directly one way or the other to
the question, whether an^ charge which was
brought against Le Maitre, Hicgins, and
Smith was or was not well founded; he onlir
gives the reasons why he is at enmity with
them, and why be thinks they have used him .
ill ; and^ as far as he was concerned in it, a
sort of apology for- his bringing forward a
charge which,* whether true or fuse, perhaps
otherwise he might not hive done,

John Cleverton said he was a prisoner in,
Brest, at the time Crossficld was there, on
board the same prison ship, from the 19tb of
Februaiy to early in May : he does not recoU
lect any declaration respecting the king, but
he has frequently heard Crossfield sing repub-.
lican songs ; that he never heard him make,
any declaration as to any plot there was
against any body ; that there were other cap*
tains of vessels, captain Clarke, captain Blign,
Mr. Dennis, a man of the name of Denton,
and Mr. Widdiman, who used all to mess to*
gether ; he said Crossfield was a very joUjr
fellow ; that the sick prisoners were sent to.
the hospital ; he himself went to the hospital
on the 19th of Mpiy ; that he came over in
the same cartel with the prisoner ; he said he
knew that in the montli of May the prisoner
signed his proper name Crossfield, because be
signed it to some instrument of his at his re-
quest; they used to call him doctor; there
was no particular intimacy, he 'said, between
Crossfield and -Dennis, or Le Bretton *. the
witness said that they afterwards landed at
Fowey; that to tfa^ best of his judgment-
Crossfield appeared glad that he was got over ;
be said he himself, at the time he was taken,
was going to the Canaries, as agent to a

8091

Jot High Treaton.

A. D. 1^96.

t«IO

house io St. JohiMtreet, to collect wines for
thegoveracneot; he described Crossfield as a
inaQ who draok hard ; he said he does not
femember hearing Crossfield say any thing of
havinv settled any a&irs in France to his sa«
tis&ction ; he does not know neither that he
out the name of Wilson into the list, but has
Beard that he did; there were no (juarrels
about republican principles ; then he is asked
whetlier a song that is shown bira was one of
the son^s Crossfield sung ? he said he never
beard hun sing that song but once or twice,
the chorus in particular, he said, he had a re-
Golleclion of; tliat son^ was read. Gentle-
men, I shall not repeat it to you, it is not at
all essential to the cause, and it were better
that such songs should have no circulation ; a
more flagrant seditious song, aiming more di-
rectly at the whole constitution of the govern-
ment of this country, consisting of King,
Ix>rds, and Commons, could not have been
composed : it was truly said by Mr* Attorney
General, that it was an epitome of every thing
that could be imagined to be sedition ; though
the name of our King is not in terms menti-
oned, yet Mr. Cleverton, if he had recollected
himself, could hardly have thought himself
justified in saying that this man had ne-
ver said any thing reflecting u|)on the king.

Attlhany Collins, the next witness, said he
was a captain of one of the prison ships, he
explained that by siting that they were cartel
ships that were in the river, and the French
convert^ the cartel ships into prisons; he
said that he heard there was a medical man
on board one of the other ships^ and therefore
he invited him on Imard his ship, and that
turned out to be the prisoner Crossfield ; that
he considered himself as much indebted to
him for his care and attention in his profes-
son, and he thinks he saved the lives of fifty
or may people by it ? he messed in the cabin
with him ; there were the two Byrons and
some others ; he had not known him before ;
he says, for want of better employment, they
drank too much ; he solemnly avows he never
beard any thing of plots aeamst the govern-
ment; that the witness. Winter, was some-
times at that mess, and told ridiculous stories,
one was, the catching the devil in the shape of a
bare; he took the hare for a devil, and was
▼eiy much displeased when they attempted to
contradict him; and he said he was the com-
mon laughing stock on board ; he believed he
was iKHnewhat flighty, whether from the loss
of his property (for he understood he had lost
a 0ood dea} of property) or whether the effect,
ot his imprisonment he could not tell; he
walked about in the night talking to himself,
and slept very little ; he never had any con-
versation with Winter about Crossfield : the
witness lived mostly with Crossfield ; he said
Crossfield mentioned the derangement of his
circumslanceSy but did not mention the oc-
casion of his leaving England, or whetlier
that was the occasion; he sung songs, but.
none o( them ^igaiti^t the govci[mnent; he
' VOL. XXVT.

does not recollect any such song as that the
chorus of which is, "'Plant, plant, the tree;'*
he did hear that Crossfield put his name down
in the list, when Uiey were to be exchanged,
H. Wilson, it did not surprise him at all,
having communicated to him the embarrass^
ment of his circumstances he ascribed it to
that ; he said liis conduct was uniformly that
of an orderly and good subject; that he repro^
bated the war, and called it an uniust war: he
said he has often heard him say tnat the com-
mandant had offered to let him stay, and to give
him an establishment to superintend the hos-
pitals, but he declined it, rather wishing to be
at home, and seemed to rejoice in returning
home ; he said he never saw Mr. Cleverton
above once or twice, for he was part of the
time on board one of the other ships, and
part of the time at the hospital, sick.

Elizabeth Smith is then called, who is a
widow, hvin^ at No. 17, Great Hermitage
street, Wapping, where she has lived for tntf
last eight years, having lived in Red lion-
street for the seven preceding years; she
said she has known Crossfield five years, that
he was very often to and fro, that he was a
man of levity, but by no means of a harsh and
severe temper; she knew captain Clarke of
the Pomona, she has known him two years ;
she had also seen the witness, Le Bretton,
that he was before the mast, with captain
Clarke; that he used to come to captain
Clarke ; she remembered his coming after his
return } he told her she might expect captain
Clarke soon, for he had CNeen examined at
Guildhall or somewhere. Le Bretton said tcr
captain. Clarke, that he had heard Crossfield
describing a gun to him, that he, Clarke, was
present^ which Clarke denied. Le Bretton said,
several times, he honed he should hang him.
Crossfield, she says, lodged with her at three
different times, under the name of Crossfield ;
that the last time he lodged with her was
about a month before he went out ; she says
on Christinas day Clarke dined at her house,
and Crossfield dined with him ; that was the
day before Clarke went on board his ship;
that Crossfield did not join the ship for five
weeks after, at Portsmouth ; that he went by
the name of: Crossfield while at her house,*
and she apprehends he went to the Change,
and other different places, with the company
in the house, )iai;ticularly captain White : one
day Crossfield canve in when captain Clarke
was speaking to sopne gentleman to recom-
him a surgeon, and Cro^eld sud perhaps he
might go with him: she said Crossfield was a
good natured man, who would hurt nobody ;
she d^ies that she ever asked Le Bretton te
be favourable to Crossfield, and that jshe never
said truth was not to be spoken at all times »
she said she never spoke either to Le Bret*^
ton or Dennis in that manner, tliat she had
not seen them since Le Bretton was about the,
house.

They then caU five witnesses to the prir
soger's chan^cter. ^ -

P

Ill]

36 GBORGE III.

Trial of Robert Thomas CrossfieU

(»lf

Krs. Watson is tha first ^tneat; tiM ttid
Crossfield lodsed at her houtc in Dyer's -build*
ingt, that he radgnl there by his own name ;
that he came oo toe 3dth of July 17M, and
staid two months, that he kept nothing locked
v^ that he was a very careless kind ef man, but
behaved extremely well ; she never saw him
afterwards, and no inquiry was ever made
about him.

Mrs. BeasW said, she had known him four
years, he had the character of a humane
good naiured man.

Mr. Wyld, a surgeon, in the Kent-road,
said, be had known him three years, and
gave him a very good character for his good
nature and humanity.

Mr. Wilson, a surveyor, in Dorset- street,
taid be had.known him from a child, that he
was an exceeding good man, and he neves
thought he could commit any crime.

Mr. Uepbura, a sureeon, in Great Hermt-
tage-«treet, said he has Known him fouryeavs,
he had attexkled the family where Crossfield
lodged, he thought him a light, easy, good-
natured man.

They then, on the part of the prosecution
called op Thomas Dennis, and John Le Bret-
loa, in order to con^nt Mrs. Smith.

Thomas Dennis said, that Mrs. Smith made
inquiries of him what he knew about this
charge against Crossfield F and she said, she
hop^ that he would not declare any thing to
kurt him. He said, there were warm ^sputes
at dinner, that there were three or four cap>
tains of ships present: she said she would
say any thing to save him ; and that captain
Smith, who was present, said, Mrs. Smith
you ought to be asnamed of yourself to say
such a thing. Ho said captain Clarke, cap-
tain Smith, and a young gentleman that had
apartments there, whom he believes to be a
wharfinger, were present at this tim^.

John Le Bretton said, that he very well
knew Mrs. Smith; that she asked him what
bo bad said, and she said she hoped he would
Bot say any thing to hurt the prisoner; that
be told her he should speak the truth, and
did not know whether it would hurt him
orno ; to which she answered^ that the truth
vas not always to bo spoken ; so that you see
boio orises a question, whether Mrs. Smith
baa materially impeached the credit of Le
Bretton, or whether Le Bretton and Dennis
tMther have matortally impeached the credii
•fMrs. Smith| that is a subject which is en*
tirely for the consideration of the jury : when
you are ascertaining what is the true stato of
the faets in evidence, you must make up jrour
Minds as to tbal^ whether you will consider
MvSi Smitb as having materially impeached
the credit of 'Le Bretton, or whether yon
think imon the result of the evidence Le Bret-
ton and Dennis together have impeaebed her
credit ; i^ it bo true that she tampered with
these witnesses, and said she would say any
thiiu; for this man to save bin, lAMoad of im-
peacuog the ciedit of the witoms^ she is her-

self discredited s alt thati shaO say upon It is^
that thtt man Dennis, who I do not find is
impeaebed at all by her evidence, does aver
that it was so, and does boldly appeal to
persons who were present at the time, who
at least horeofter^it not now, misht contradict
him if he did not spoak the truth.

Gentlemen, I have now tone through the
evidence ; I toldyou I shouiq first recapitulato
the evidenooi and then endeavour to inform
you in what manner this evidence applies to
establish the whole or any part of the overt
aets contained in this indictment, and there
appear to mo to be two overt acts, or rather
two different sets of overt acts, varying only a»
to the descHption of the instrument, one being
coupled with the poisoned arrow, the other
not ; in other respects it is in troth but one
set of overt acts, they are both of the same
nature, they iMth charge a conspiracy to pre-
pare an instniment to destroy the kmg, andf
they both of them charge the employment of
Hill to make models for a part of that ittstn»-
ment ; and either of them, if they were made
out satisfactorily, would certainly be sufficient
to support this indictment.

First then, you are to consider whether
there is any evidence before you of this con-
spiracy to procure the instrument described
to be made, being descrikied two dtffeient
ways.

You are next to consider (if yon are satisfied
that there was a conspiracy in which this pri-
soner was involved to prepare such an instru-
ment), Whether the purpose for which it waa
to be prepared is sufficiently ascertained by the
evidence.

Thus far is clear, that three people, of whom
one was by the positive evidence of Pkdmer
fixed to be the prisoner Crossfield, did go»
upon the day mentioned by the witnesses, I
think one of them said the fourth of Septetn*
her, to three different brass-founders, and
did there apply to have a brass tube made, of
a particular description, which they gave
when they went to the first man ; and though
they desired to have a cylinder very correct,
and very exact, yet they did not think fit to
disclose the occasion for which they wanted
this cylinder^ in which there is certunly an
air of^ mystery. It appeara that when they
wera al another brass-founder's, they said
that it was wanted for sometbiiig belonging
to an electrifymg machine Itelonging to Up-
ton; i f it had really been wanted for that pur*
pose, one can hardly see a good reason whjr
there should be any secrecy when they were
at the first brass-foonder*s

It af)pears too, that three persons, one of
whom is sworn to be Crossfield (the lame man,
Upton, is, I think, spoken to by all of them)
went forwards to Hill's, to get a model made
for part of something ; perhaps when you com-
pare that part of the evidence with the evi-
dence arismg fipom the ap^iration to one ef
the biais-founder'si it may be exeliuaod htm
theycaiae te «Wl/f(ir tlM.|DOomt jBodcIf

ilS] Jir High Ttm$on.

9DU recollect one of the biasa*foim«)en nid,
be could not undertake to make it unleea they
would produce him a modeli or a pattern ;
tbey aaked hin whether a rocket ca^e would
notdo^ beaaid itmichtdoif itwaacknedat
the cnJa ; whether that would or not have
done I do sot knoW| hut they did not agree
tfaere^ and the question is whether that did
oot suggest the bint for getting somethioe
doneia wood from whence the hrass-wor^
flight oe cas^ which was allerwards to be
made use of? three persons went upon this
emnd ; there is a question in the evidence
vbether Crossfield oi^ht to be taken to be
cooaenting to wbat waa. done at that time,
supposing he was there; and the witness,
l^aJmer^ has certainly introduced circum*
alancee to vender it doubtful^ though all these
three persona were ureeenty whether more
than one of them tooK any part, for he would
|iav« vou to understand that it was an acci*
dental oieeting of the three ; jthat Crossfield
and be were dming together, tnaC they went
to Upton's only for the sake of his gcttina his
vaCcL and tlut it was merely by acdoent,
they being going into the cityi that they
walked wiui Upton ; and perii^M the situation
of the different places they went to may in
eome measure correspond with that, A>r they
•eem to have begun in New-street, then to
have gone to Shoe-lane, and then to Cock-
laoe^ which seems to be all in one direction.
On the other hand, though Palmer has said
tbis» there certainly are circumstances fit for
your consideration, to fix if not upon Palmer,
at least upon the other two, the having a good
deal to do with the transactions at these brass-
founders, and particularly atHiiPs ; oneof the
brass* founders told you that one of the* men,
who could not be Palmer^ for he disavows it,
and who waa not the lame man, asked in what
time the thing would be finished, which could
be nothing to him, unless he had something
to do with the general purpose for which
thenr went there ; and as to the transaction at
UilH 1m>^ Hill and Palmer say that this
nun, who turns out now according to the
evidence of Palmer to be Crossfield, did take
aome part in making the sketch by which
Hill was to work ; now that seems veiy in-
consistent with the notion that it was purely
an accidental meeting;, and that they were
there only aa companions to Upton, who was
doif^ his own business, without any partici-
pation whatever with them in that business ;
to be sure it is not absolutely impossible that
when an aukward sketch was maaing, a man
who waa not immediately concerned in it
Slight take a pen and make a stroke ; how-
«var, it IS a dreumstance that is to be weighed
in the case upon the whole of the evidence,
aa tending to show that these three persons
weaa-at a!l these places for the purpose of
procuring, first of all, this brass qy under to be
made : waA in the next place procuring the
model to be made, from whence a brass cy-
linder wna to be Mde by wme other person. ,

1

A. D. 1796.

liH

Supposing yon see itaaoD to believe thAt
this prisoner was consenting to that which
was doing at these bouses, |«incipaUy by Up-
ton, that he was there oonsenting to it, and
taking part in it; the consequence would be
that Uien there would be evidence for your
consideration to prove that there was an
agreement by the prisoner among others, for
the procuring an instrument to be made, wbidi
constitutes a part of one of the overt acta ;
and that there waa by the prisoner, as well as
by others, an actual employment of Hill to
make a part of this instrument; another, and
the most nuterial part of the overt act is the
purpose fbr which it waa to be made; the
whole of the overt act must be proved, and
the evidence will or will not amount to such
proo^ as it shall or shall net turn out lo your
satisnction^ that the purpose for which tfaub
instrument was to be maoe was, teasaaasiQate
the king; as to which this part of the evidenee
baa no application; vou are referred therefi>re
to <ieclarations which have been made by this
priaoner when he waa out of tlits country,
when a prisoner on board a priaen-abip, aa
evidence aufficient to aatisfy you for what
purpose he had agreed with the others to get
this instrument prepared, and to get Uill to
execute the model.

The evidence that you have beard, is from
four different witneasea; John Le Brettoo,
Thomaa Dennis, Jaraea Winter, and Richard
Penny, It has been observed with great
truth that the accounts are not uniform, thai
sometimes he spoke of having attempted to
assassinate the king, at other times of^ having
invented an instrument for the purpose of aa^
sassinating the king, at other times of having
actually shot at the king, and of an intention
lo shoot at him; these declarations unques-
tionably are not uniform, they are also open
to the objection that they are veiy extrava-
gant in their nature, probably some of thenl
false ; that it would be excessively absurd in
a man in the Mtuation of the prisoner to use
such expressions, if he were guilty ; almost m
absurd as to use them, if he was not guilty ;
and it would be very difficult to imagine that
he should do that. Thev assist that obaervar*
tion by what ia very tairly argued for the
priaoner ; that a man of a li^t wild cast, sub*
lect to be intoxicated, a talking rattling man,
if he did aay any thins of this aert, wouhl
hardly be auppoaed to be aerioua in what he
said; or mean to expose himself to a charge of
so heavy a nature, as that which these decln*
rations will import. You will be disposed to
give a great deal of weight to the observation
which arises upon the nature of those deda*
mtiena ; on the other hand, undoubtedly there
is a most remarkable coincidence in every one
of these deebrations, with respect to the na*
ture of the instrument which ke talks of, and
the manner in which it was to be used ; fbr
the aooounts given by all the four witnasaai
apeaJcofadart to be blown throud^ a tube^
aadtheuNofillobe aa expreased in these

815]

36 GEORGE III.

Trud of Robert Thomas Crossfield

tSlff

declarations, for' the purpose of assassinatiog
the king.

A man may have a bad habit of talking
Tery wildly and exlrava^ntly, but to account
for these declarations without imputing guilt,
there must be an impression upon the mind
of the prisoner almost to insanil^ ; otherwise,
how is it to be believed that he, an innocent
man, should always recur to this, that this
should always make a part of, or be referred
to in these declarations, that there was an
air-gun he had invented, which was to ope-
rate by the means of throwing a dart by the
efkci of condensed or inflammable air.

Gentlemen, those declarations have been
as it seems \o me improperly called confes-
sions, they are not properly confessions which
import a particular charge first made, and an
acknowledgment of that charge ; they are de-
clarations made by the prisoner at diflPerent
times, upon different occasions; which declar-
ations referring to former existing facts, are
the explanation and connexion of those fiiCtsj
-which serve to make those facts intelligible;
whatever question may have arisen at any
time respecting the admission of confessions
in high treason, I take it that there never was
a question made whether when facts had been
stated, the explanation of those facts might
not be taken from the mouth of the prisoner.
According to the rules of evidence what a pri-
soner has said respecting a particular fact is
admissible evidence, not in the nature of a
confession, but as evidence of the particular
lact ; and that it is therefore agreeable to the
general law of evidence to receive such decla^
rations in all cases whatever, in order to ex-
plain and to establish the true state of any
matter of fact which is in dispute, or the sub-
ject of inquiry beforea jury ; as far, therefore,
as regards the admitting these declarations of
this prisoner as evidence for your censideration,
I have no doubt in stating it to you*as my
opinion in point of law; — if my brother and
Mr. Recorder see any reason to hesitate upon
it, they will give you their opinion ; — but I
see no reason to doubt, but that all these de-
clarations are good evidence in law, in order
to explain the facts that had been before staled,
and to ate them their proper sense and their
proper Bearing ; and the only auestion will be
as to the effect of them, and wnether they do
or do not sufficiently satisfy you (it being first
established to your satisfaction that this pri-
soner was one of those who were concerned
in going to these people, and using the means
to ^t an instrument prepared, both by in-
quiry for a cylinder, and also by bespeaking
a model), I sa^, whether they do or do not
sufficiently satisfy you for what purpose that
cylinder was procured, and for what purpose
those parts of that instrument were ordered
to be made ; whether for the purpose, that
when the instrument was completed, it should
be used for the dangerous and traitorous pur-
pose imputed by the present Indictment.

Gentlemen^ this is to be ioferrei princi-

pally from the substance *of the evidence of
the prisoner's declarations; but on the part of
the prosecutibn they bavc also endeavoured
to strengthen that inference, by showing you
in evidence, what the conduct of the prisoner
has been ; and they say, and they say truly,
if they make out that the conduct of the
prisoner has been, that he has either ori-
ginally withdrawn himself from justice, or
that he has taken pains to secrete himself
from justice, after he was apprehcinded ; that
those are circumstances whicn do at least in-
fer a consciousness of very g^rcat guilt, and if
there be no other reason assisned for tlie con-
duct of the party, very much corroborating
and supporting the charge of the particular
guilt that is imputed to him.

You have heard a great number of obser-
vations upon the particular parts of the evi-
dence, as to the prisoner's conduct, respect-
ing his originally withdrawing himself from
this country ; it will be a point for you to sa-
tisfy yourselves about, whether he did witt>-
draw from this countrv under the apprehen-
sions of being involved in this charge, or whe-
ther he withdrew firom this country merely
on account of the pressure of his circum-
stances ; they conclude on the part of the
prosecution, that he withdrew from this coun-
try on account of this charge, and they do
it upon the ground principally of Pal-
mer's evidence. Palmer having represented
that he and Crossfield went away to Bristol
soon after Le Maitre and iliggins were
taken up, and that though they returned again,
he never returned to his old lodgings,
but went to Wappinv; and that he kept
the place where ne lodged a secret, even
from Palmer, which is a circumstance that is
a little difficult to account for, considering the
intimacy he admits to subsist between them,
considering that Palmer communicated to
Crossfield that the privy councH had made
inquiry after him, and that he had undiertaken
to produce him before the privy council, and
he knew that Crossfield did not choose to go
before the privy council : they infer that the
ti-ue reason for his not going to his former
lodeino; was because he wished to secrete him-
self; that the true reason for his going after-
wards onboard the ship was because he wished
to get out of the reacn of the privy council ;
the circumstance of Palmer not knowing
where he lodged, can hardly be accounted for
in any other way, than by Palmer's not wish-
ing to know it; to be sure if he had known
it, it would be more difficult to avoid those
inquiries that might be made afler Crossfield,
he having undertaken to produce him.

On the other hand, opposed to this, is the
account given on the (Ktrt of the prisoner by
his witnesses, that in truth he originalljr
withdrew from London only in order to settle
at Bristol if it should appear eligible ; tliat he
came back to London and lived publicly at
Wapping, using no means to coiiceal himself,
till an opportunity offered by accident of

t

«I71

J(in' High Dreawfii

A. D. 1796.

[918

eoing on board captain Cku^ce's ship, and that
ne went on board because he coukl not stay
in tbia country, hairing been obliged to assign
the wtiole of his property for the benefit of
his creditors. The fad, with respect to that,
deaends partly upon the creoit due to
Fiunier's evidence, and more especially to
Mrs. Smith's evidence, because she took upon
herself to say, that Captain clarke mentioned
his wanting a surgeon in the presence of
Crossfield, and that Crossfield said perhaps
be might go with hiniN^the credit of Mrs.
South will depend upon whether you think
she is « &ir witness speaking the truth,
cv whether you think she comes under that
bias imputed by Dennis in particular, and the
other witness, that she comes resolved to saj
whatever she could for the benefit of this
man; that is a point entirely for you to
settle ; if this man withdrew from the danger
that he thought himself in of being appre-
hended under this charge, that is a strong
corroboration of all the rest of the evidence.
On the other hand, if he withdrew from the
mere pressure of his circumstances, he will
avoid all the inferences that have been made
ifoni his conduct in that particular. Then as
to the rest of his conduct, he appears by the
evidence of one of his own witnesses, when he
was on board the prison-ships, to have been
a man of dangerous principles by the language
be held, by the republican songs whicti he
mng, and above all by that republican song
which is \M before you. Gentlemen, it would
not be fiiir in point of argument (and in times
Mke these we feel the full force of the objec-
tion), to draw a partiailar conclusion in
nroof of a particular offence, from a main's
oeing tainted with such unhappy pnnciples ;
therefore, upon this evidence I lay very little
stress. Upon the whole of the evidence of
the prisoner's general conduct while he was
abroad, it does not appear to me to afford any
answer to this charge. When it is urged to
be a strong corroboration of it, perhaps it
hardly goes quite to that length, being, in the
Ksult of it rather evidence of character, than
of matter of fact referable to this charge.
Wben the prisoner returned to England, and
when he was apprehended in consequence of
Winter's information, his conduct seems to
be more difficult to be reconciled with his in-
nocence, and there is no contrariety in the
evidence with respect to that, for it is estal>-
Hshed against him that.he would have bribed
an oflioer to have let him go ; and he talked
hi a way which leads one to suppose that he
would not have hesitated to have done some-
ttaing worse, in order to have got out of the
custody he was then in.
' This cahAot be accounted for by supposing
he was unddr any apprehension of l>eing
sent to gaol by his creditors, for there was no
reason to suppose this was a charge made
against him by creditors; on the other hand,
t£e circumstances plainly denoted he was
under a charge of a very different nature.

Constables; not a common officer, qaine for
him by the name of Crossfield ; he certainly
answered to the name of Crossfield; it would
have been vain indeed to deny his name at
that time. Under those circumstances, he
made that offer, which certainly is imputable
to him as evidence of a consciousness of very
great guilt; whether it applies directly to the
support of this charge aeainst him whieh is
now under your consi^ation is for your
judgment.

Gentlemen, considering the declarations of
the prisoner as evidence sufficient in its na-
ture to prove the use and application of the'
instruments that were proposed to be made,I
am of opinion that, upon the whole case be-
fore you, there is evidence proper to be sob^*
mitted to your con»deration to prove the two
overt acts to which I have applied the evi*
dence on this indictment. Though I state to
^u that there is evidence for your considera-
tion, it would not be for me, after having
heard his defence and commented upon it, to'
state, that the evidence is sufficient to satisfy
your consciences — that is vour business ; I
only say, that in law the evidence will be suffi-
cient to be left to vour consideration to prove'
the overt acts, unless he gives a sufficient an-
swer. Now, then, the question will be, what
answer the prisoner has made : he has answered
partly by very able observations from his coun-
sel, partly by evidence. The learned cotmsel
(Mr. Adam) who opened his case told yoir,
that he brought with him into this cause no
other duties than those of the advocate — I
think he did not do himself justice when he
said that, for I think from his manner of
treating the subject, he brought with him the
duties of a good subject and of a good citizen;
one whom nothing could tempt to endeavour
to sap the foundations of the law and the con-
stitution of the country under which we live ;
he admitted distinctly that the onlv question
was, whether the parties were guilty of the
fact, — whether any of the overt acts were
sufficiently proved. To the first and most
general observation made for the- prisoner,
that as the crime is enormous, and dreadfully
enormous indeed it is, so the proof ought to
be clear, I most cordiaJlv subscribe.

As to the particular observations that were
made upon particular detached parts of the
evideuce I shall leave them to your consider-
ation with only one observation upon them,
which is, that observations upon detached
parts of evidence can seldom go for much,
because the fact that results is not from any
one particular piece of evidence, but it is
from the whole evidence taken together —
from the chain of cirsumstances which a
great number of facts given in evidence do
ultimately form ; from roence most frequently
the fact results which is the material proof in
the cause, it is very rarely the result of any
one particular piece of evidence, aud therefore
I cannot admit that it can properly be said
that any thing which passed at the first brass*

»193

S6 GEORGE UI.

Trial ff'Boipf Tk0mo9 CrotsfieU

Itn

V(^ed pa proof f i| cerlainly 4id cooTey proof
vnicb MTlis maleriAl, but oi^y mstenpil bec»uao
U ^M^alinkin the chiuo wbiclnvat aller^
vi|rd0 to be fonaed upop whkh the general
zesult was to he taken. You have cei tain^y
l^eoi) fddfOMed wi^ a great many very proper
axHt weighty confoderatiofM upon the nature
of the declaratioQS^ of the ooniesaioiia as they
n^ere^c^i), of the prisoner; vou have heard
them, and will ^ive them all the weight they
^eserv^. I am inf lined to m as far as I pos-
sibly cfiUi with respect tp aU possible allow-
ances thf^t can be Diade (or- sueh declarations
a^ i^e here given in eyideQce»al)pwiag for the
pK>siihJe mistake of the pahjr who made these
QqctaratttQaiApQiBlei'IamMii^eand expres*
8|o4i» aad aUwiQg for mistake in point <» ap-
prehenaioii oif the party who hears the declar-
i^ioos with aU these allowances still the
guestion will be whetber, in respect of the oo-
incideace which I have observed upon, you
can explain the whole of these declarations^
apd avoid makiiu; the conchision from them,
that this iqan duTdieltiBctly acknowledjge that
he was one of the three that had contrived an
instrument which was to be eopeloyed for the
purpose of assassinating the King. If you
are of opinion that these declarations, upon
the strength of the observation made by the
QpUBsel, have not sufteient weight in your
njiiBde, and do not satisfy your consciences,
of course, without going farther, there would
he an end of this case; oecause, undoubted^,
the case rests both upon the credit and upon
the eiSect of those declarations piade by the
pcisGiner: if the obsematioDa made by the
counsel should not have sufficiently explained
awfl^ these declarations, you will then consi-
der how (ar the facts laid before you in evi*
denceonlhe putelthe prisoner will assist
these obsewaUons, or will defeat the effect of
this evidence.

Thqf hegio by calling to yoii witnesses to
piove that the whole of thischacge originated
m flSiaJioe, conceived b^l one Upton^. who is
not hefe,, ^giiintt. Higg^s^ Le Maitre^ and
Sesith^ii^eonseaiieB^eofaauarrelthat they
had la a> cl^nb, which they called the London
Correspondijag Society ;. and they have cer*
taiidy given evidence that there was a quar-
rel, which Moceeded to a considerable length ;
it is eQQHgn, without going into the particu-
lars of it, to state that there was such a quar-
rel ; but the difficulty^is^ this psirt of the case is,
supDoayig that ibis 'was clear^ established,
(ani let «t have ^h^ weight* it will when
those pefipns mik whom i\m man is preved
.to h»ve mAanelled shaU come before a jury
to be tried), what application can it have to
the pvesentease? beixMise, if ^ou-aie to sup^
pose, this whote charge origmated in that
quarrel, what is to bacoma of all those cis*
cmnstaiBcea which hffveaa- immediate appU-
cation, to the prisoner Crossfield^ with wooea
Upton has not quarrelled. 9eooUeet the obr
eecrali^a which wei snde bgi^tho Mm^x^

geaeiali ead whk^ does b««r directly agai&si
this prisoner^ because with him there wee oe
j|uarrel» that it would be the strangest Ihiog
in the world if idl Uiese drcuflUftan^ whiefi
are in evidence against Crossfield, shoeJd
have happened by accident, Croasfield
having no manuer of implication in the
business; and that he should have made
any of these dedaratioiis which are iit
evidence, when in truth there wee no
bottom at all Ho any part of the oase-^when
this whole business orupnated in a quarral
between other pe<^e ; if the case were other-*
wise, and there was really a foundation for tbe
charge, but the charge had first been brekighi
ag^nst Higgins, Le M^tre, and Smith, in
oonsequence of a quarrel, Ibat would rnkm
the whole case mtelhgible. The sMt*
ne^«general'8 obaervationa oertaiity deseree
weight; for it might be»ihatthou^ Uplsa
hrought forward tab charge in order to vedl
his malice agunst these people, yet that it
was a charge founded in met, in which this
prisoner was implicated : how to reconcile it
to that which is now su^fsted, that it is all
invention is to mct I confess, totally imeessi

hie ; if you can do it, he will hate the i
tase of It

For the purpose of explaiiiing the eonduci
of Grossfield at Brest, and m his passece
home, thev have called two witnesses, of the
name of Cleverton and Collins. I feel it dif«
ficult to state to you anv direct result frea
that evidence ; ia truth the two witnesses d»
not i^ree in their representation of thb
man's conduct;— Clever|oe admits him la
have gone strange lengths, though he nevfif
happened to hear a^y of those thix^s wihids
the other peop^ have charged him with hav**
ing said : Collins, on the other hand, repie«
sents him as an orderly decent man, discover'*
ing no emnity, no aversion to the goveramenl
simply Massing the war, and he certain^
speaks of him nandsomel^F in other parts of
his conduct, at the ^ame tune that he was ia
his private character light, a»t to drink and
to rattle, hut upon the whole he describes hiaa
as an innocent subject, and as a man in some
respects of great merit : these two witnesses^
therefore, olSering a good deal in their tesi*
mox^ it is dif&Mut to draw any particnler re»
suit from their evideaoe appu^^le to thia
case ; the utmost that oaa be made of it is»
that, sometimes, in some companies, he did
sing repubUeaa son§M^ in others he did net ■
that in seme places lie wae reserved' and eare*
fiilofhi8eonauGt,i|iotheisnots<)w There thi*
must lesl* except as to ^ha effect of what It
censidef as a very good ehacacter ^en e€
him by Mr. Collins.

I have already observed to you upon the
evidence of Mts. Smith,, and upon the evi*
dence of Mr. Palmer, whose evidence has
been Msed for the prisooee, to conftitcitead^*
fence upon that part of the caw whifBhrrmecte
the pr^bililyef this man'ahami^Mmri^

n

fiff IHgh Ttituon*

A. D. 1796.

[888

Hwliid^ and Bmith ^fms itiadf.^1 do not I
think I can add aojr thing, therefore you will
judge of it; I mention it now only as beinz a
part of the defetice, you will consider what
efiect k ought to have.

They then proceeded to establish the cha-
ncier of this prisoner, which is certainly a
proper head of evidence, sometimes ex-
tremely useful, sometimes of weight enoueh
almost to weigh down any thing that can he
said against a man. With regard to this per-
son's character, they do not carrv it a great
way; thev represent him as a light man,
* man of levity of maners, very careless, apt
to drink, and distressed in his circumstances,
but Bood natured, humane, and as thev think
not likely to do an ill thing. And I think it
ri^ht Co add here Collins's account, which I
think goes as mnch in favour of his character
as any part of the evidence ; because a man
who will in such a situation as he and every
EM:Iish prisoner were in, when requested, come
on boanl a sick ship, and devote his time and
attention to the care of a crew who were not
able to pay him, and will take upon him a se-
vere duly, and be therebj the means of saving
a great many lives, has m that respect a great
flul of merit, and indeed, such a character as
they describe him to be of, in other respects,
is a character which leads one to be surprised
that a naa of that descriptym should enter
into such a conspiracy as this is, for undoubt-
edly it is the conspiracy of dark and malig-
nant minds, and very unlike that of a man of
the character which they prove him to bear.
I can only say with respect to this, that in
some cases good habits, manners, and princi-
ples are tainted and corrupted by circum-
stances ; and I am afraid that nothing has
done more towanls corrupting them than the
efiiision of modern political principles, which
have unsettled men's minds, and have pre-
pared them to conceive that new duties belong
to them, and to entertain but loose notions of
the means by which the speculative good that
they propose to effect may be brought about:
whether any such circumstances have entered
into this business or no I do not know ; this
man was in a situation, certainly, to be deeply
tinctured with republican notions : and thev
could not be carried into the excess into which
they are carried in that son^ — ^that execra-
ble composition, which was laid before you —
without a dereliction of all principle, without
a man's having by degrees prepared himself
to become, from a humane, tender, good-
hearted man, capable of doing friendly dBces
and bearing his part in the society in which
be lives — to become a downright monster —
not a citiien, not a man, but, I repeat, a
downright monster.

GenUemen, I shall have discharsed m^
duty when I have told you, that the evi-
dence which is before you u evidence proper
Ibr your consideration, as proof of these
overt acts. I should think you would be
disposedi pr'mcipally to confine your atten-

tion to the- evert act, as to the lattrDment last
described in the indictment ; my reason for
thinking so is this, because, if I recollect
ri^ht, there is bnt one witncds that speaks of
this instrument to be put in operation for the
purpose of throwing a poisoned dart, and that
witness is Winter. Now, independent of all
objection which might arise from there being
but one witness to this fact, there certainly
ate some exceptions to Winter's testimony ;
and if it stands alone, with regaid to the cir-
cumstance of the poisoned darl^ It would be a
difficult thing, perhaps, for vou to satisfy
yourselves to rely upon his evidence as to that
part of the ease; but the instrument moie
generally described remains the substance of
another overt act, proved by other witnesses
as well as by Winter, upon which, thereiere,
it seems to me that it would be the safet
course for you to proceed. The observstiea
was hk. with regard to Wimer, that thoueh
he might be a very flighty man^ yet that bo
must liave received somfe impression fhioi
what passed between him and Crossfield^ im*
porting some charge ajndnst Crossiield, of a
very criminal nature^ from the circumstance
that he iromediatelv, on his coming on shorn
went and |ave itiformation before a juttice,
and that circumstance is corroborative^ at
least, of the evidence of the other witnesses,
though it mw not be sufficient to enUtle hins
on account of the natural infirmity belonging,
to him, to full and entire credit, for the whole
evidence he has given^ and, I think it would
not be right to press his evidence much far«
ther. I concluae, therefore, what I have to
offer to your consideration by stating to you,
that in consideration of law, the tram ofevi-
deuce, which has been laid before you, is suf-
ficient to be submitted to your judgment a»
proof, by two sufficient witnessess, of these
two overt acts the conspiring to prepare an
instrument, not particularly descrmea for the
purpose of destroying the kmg; and the hav-
ing employed Hill to make a model for a part
oAuch instrument

With regard to the weight of the evidence
as sufficient, or not sufficient to satisfy your
judgment as to the truth of it, and as to the
entire effect of it, that is exclusively ^our pro-
vince, and I have never an inclination to in^
terfere with the province of a jury, upon an^
subject, and least of all upon a subject of thie
nature, in which the interests of the public are
so deeply involved, and in which the life of
an inaividual is concerned > it is a sacred
trust reposed in tou. And now, gentlemen,
after having heard all that can be said upon
this subject it is your province to make true
deliverance between our sovereign lord the
king, and this prisoner at the bar.

The Jur^ withdrew at six o* dock to consider
of their verdict, they returned into court
twentv minutes before eight| with a ver-
dict of Not Guilty.

The prisoner was immediately discharged.

223] 86 GEORGE IIL

Thursday, May i9th 1796.

Paul Thomas Le Maitre, John Smith, and
George Higgins were set to the bar.

The first twelve gentlemen in the panel
who appeared, were sworn as the Jury; the
Clerk ot Arraigns then charged the jury with
the prisoners in the usual form.

Mr. Attorney OeneraL^^Gtntlefnen of the
Jury ; -<In the discharge of my official duty, I
felt myself bound, under the then circum-
stances of the case, to lay before a grand jury
of the country, an indictment against the

Eiaouersat the bar for high treason. The
w has ordained that no man shall be indicted
or tried for that offence, unless there are two
witnesses to an overt act, or one witness
to one overt act, and one witness to another
overt act of the same species of treason.

I had occasion to lay before a jury a case
against a person, who was indict«l together
with those now at the bar. U pon that trial I
stated what I believed to be a fact, which had
been very nicely examined into, that a person
of the name of Upton was dead. In conse*
qitence of a conviction that he was so, I stated
to that jury, that it was not in my power to
produce him.

In the course of that trial some sug^stion
was made, that that person was liTingi in con-

TriaU/or High Treason.

[924

sequence of which I have thought it my dutj
to inquire farther into the subject. It is im«
possible for me to say, that contrivance maj
not elude the most diligent, and the best con-'
ducted enqiiiry; but lam satisfied, as well
as I can he of any such fact, that that
man is not in existence : being so satisfied,
the law informs me, that the prisoners ought
not to be put on their trial, and that they
ought not to be put in jeopardy, unless there
be that quantity of evidence, which is required
by law in this sort of case— It is therefore,
ray duty not to give you the trouble of hearing
insufBcient evidence, and the prisoners at the
bar are therefore entitled to that acquittal,
which, in consideration of law will make them
innocent.

At the same time I am bound to say, that
if it shall hereafter appear that those, who
have come forward in the most solemn man*
ner to induce the belief of that man's deaths
have practised an imposition, and have de-
prived the country of tne benefit of that man's
testimony ; and the person, who has been tried,
and those who now stand upon their deliver-
ance, of an opportunity of meeting it, I shall
hold rovsclf bound, if I continue in the
office which I at present unworthily fill, to
bring those persons to condign punishmenL

The Jury found the prisoners Not Guilty—
and they were immediately discharged.

•ju.

. 4

285]

James Wddonfcr High Treason*

A.'D. 1795.

[226

PROCEEDINGS

ON THE

TRIALS OF THE DEFENDERS

612. Trial of James Weldon for High Treason, before the
Court holden under a Commission of Oyer and Termi-
ner and General Gaol Delivery in and for the County
of the City of Dublin, in the Kingdom* of Ireland, on
Monday December 21st, and Tuesday December 22nd:
36 George III. a. d. 1795.*

[CouKissiOK. — Monday^ December 14f A, 1795.

Mr. Baron George sat as the judee of the
commission^ and was assistea by Mr.
Justice Chamberlain and Mr. Justice
Finucane.

IN the latter end of the month of August
1795y several persons were taken into cus-
tody in the ci^ of Dublin upon charges of
high treason, and in the ensuine commis-
sion of Oyer aiid Terminer held in Oc-
tober, bills of indictment were preferred
against them and others not then in cus-
t^y, which were returned by the Grand
Jury to be true bills.

The prisoners in custody were then
brought to the bar of the court for the pur-

' pose of having counsel and agents assigned.
— ^They were severally called upon to name
their own counsel and agents, and such as
they named were assign^ by the Courts as
follows :

Cmknj^i/br Thomas Kennedy, GeorgeLewis,
Patrick Hart, Edward Hanlon, Thomas Cooke,
John Lowry. — Messrs. Curran [afterwards'
lister of the Rolls], and M«NaUy.

Agent, — Mr. A. Fitzserald.

Counulfor Thomas MurphVy Michael Ma-
guire.— -Messrs. M*Nally and Lysaght.

Agent, — Mr. M. Kearney.

Counsel for Henry FIood.^Messrs. Fletcher
[afterwards a judge of the court of Common
Pleas.] and Rideewfty.

Agent. — Mr. F. Flood.
In the interval between the October com-'

misaon and the present, a person of the'

name of James Weldon was apprehended

upon a charge of high treason, and he,

together with such as had been previously

» ' ■ ■ ■ ■ — ■■■■'-■■■I ip' ^ — — mii^— .—

* ^aken by WilUam^Ridgeway, esqrbarris^
ter at law.

VOL. XXVIi

in custody, were served with copies of the
indictments and the captions thereof, five
days before the first day of this commis-
sion. •

This day the prisoners who had been in
custody at the last commission were seve-
rally arraigned and pleaded, Not Guilty *

When Flood was put to the bar,

Mr. Ridgeway moved that the caption of
the indictment might be read. The Court
ordered it to be read, but the clerk of the
crown said he had it not in court: whereupon
it was sent for, and being brought in, it ap-
peared to be on paper.—- The counsel then
objected toits being read and moved that the
indictment be quashed for want of acaption.
lie said the caution ought to make part of
the record, and wannexed to the indictment.
Here it is neither — ^the caption is upon paper ^
whereas the records of tnis court are always
upon porcAmm^, as the indictment is, and the
caption here is detachedftom the indictment.
In several cases in the State Trials, in the
rebels casein Fost.t *8> **i<i in Hardy's case,J:
the caption and indictment form one conti-
nued narrative, and it would be absurd, if it
were otherwise. In Fost. 4,§ the caption
states '< the bill hereunto annexed is a trae
bill, &c."

Mr. Attorney General.\\ — My lords, the
prisoner has been served with a copy of the

* The prisoners had upon the first day of
the October commission, presented petitions
stating that they were ready for their trial,
and prayine they might be tried in that com«
mission. Orig. Ed,

t Anti, Vol. 18, p. 390.

i Anti, Vol. 94, p. SS4.

§ Anti Vol. IB, p. 333.

II Arthur Wolfe, afterwards Viscoimt Kil-
warden, and Lord Chief Justice of the court
of King's Bench,

Q

387} 36 Gl^ORGS la

caption and of the indictment, which is all
that is required. He has no right to look
into the record. He might as well object,
that the indictment consisted cif serial
skins of parchment, when it is too long to
be contamed in one.

The Clerk of the Cram sud, that the
caption did iQake. pArt of the record.

Mr. KidlgoDoy.— If the officer assort ts a
fact, what every man who has sight roust
be convinced is not so, I know not how
to answer.

.The Court, said, that upoa this point,
they must be satisfied- with tbe averment
of their oflker^ and desif ed. hi|;i^, to proceed
and read trie caption.

Thi3 w^. accordingly done, si^ec. wthich
the indictment was read, and tne prisoner
was asked ^ waa he pxili^j or uqH

M,r. Ridgeway said he intended to plead
• that there was bo caption to the indict-
ment,but that his client wished for his If uj
and instructed him to waive objections m
point of form, which he had thought it his
dvjhr to stat^.

The prisoner thea pleaded Not Guilty.

James Weldon was then*piit ^^ ^^^ bar,
and desired to name his counsel; he named
M,r« Cursan and Mr. M^ally, who were
accordingly assiened to him :*~Imme(li-
ately after this, thQ Clerk of the Crown was
props^uig to apfiign the pnsoii«r. —

Mr. AfNflUjf^f&y, locds, I object. to the
nfisoner's being ajraiga^d at. this time ; I
naxreon^jr b^en assigned M* moroine^ it
is knjpps^ble I coMld be prewed to advise
Uip,m l)ia!plea, It mfiy. W^aid, be was
fl^rvj^ with a cony of the iddiciment!; but
t f^i>P^bfi^^ couj»s^l a^ apt: at, liberty to
cViK^U. wiih.s^ prisfloeff in custofdy fof tica>
a(«0^uiEitil.th^. 9x^, 9j&sigfiied; therefore^ I
^ibipity h^ ougbi. to be ftUowjirt five days
bfl^foro. he is. called qpQQ> to pliea^i

Mr, Atiarji^ QAwrtnL^Hf htii^ if the
ma99er w/ftptrtiooe to pr^are for his de-
iro^^ I hqvc^ j^ohjfpti«ii^.to any ttoig timt
19^ reasonable, Qei m^glu have conaullod
y^ri^k cpun^l af^,tb« copy of the indict-
mesAwo^, served up^o bun; fax ajythou^h
enity. two .counsel ^^ allowed to plead) m
cquKiiv hi«|i, yet he npi^ have as mttn^ to
advise with as he pleases, and dkeQtiOiBs
^re ginfeoi that counsel should beadiiiitted
t^him.

man has.ikQl had counsel assigned till this
moroiag^ and as the Attorney General does .
not seen to< objefil, I think it wouid be-
betlei to pestpoaabis arraignment.

Mr. Justice I^nucane.^-/[he act o£ pav«.
liament is not peremptory as so the asugn-
ment of counsel befoife pleading. .

Mr. Baron George.-^No objection is
niada to allowite the prisoner time.

Mr. AttoriH^ General then sad^be intend*/
ed to have Weldon tried first^ aodthejrefore

Trials ^Ihfi I>efend€rsi^

\zSSi

all the other trials must be postponed. He
mentioned Saturday for the arraignment
and trial of Weldon, which day was accord-
ingly ^ppoiottd. But on Friday Mr. At-
torney General moved to postpone the trial
to Monday, lest an objection should be
niade, that the prisoner had not five clear
dnys.

Mr. Baron George. — ^Tfaere is anothes
reason for postponing the trial ; if it bej^ui
OB Saturday, i^might last till Sunday, which
might be productive of inconvenience.
Thei^eforelet the trial stigi^d for. Mondayr.]!

Monday, December 81^

The prisoner being put to tfae bar, Mr.
M^Hallu appKed to have the caplfDn read.

Mr. Attorney Genernl opposed this appli-
cation ; the prisoner is not entitled to have
the Oiption read^he has annt^st^ c^py^ and
can aval) himself of that.

Mr« MfNaMy cited Fost. S. 298. eSO, to
show that the caption is necessary to assist
the prisoner in pleading.

Toe Court said the caption ought to ba read.
The prisoner must be furnished with a copy
of the whole record ; how can he know- whe-
ther he has such a c^y unless the wholes re-
cord be. read?

[The caption was accordingly vead^ and ap-
peared to De engrossed upon parchnnenty aoct
annexed to thie thdictment.]

^* Be it. remembered thataten a^ouitimept
<<ofa commission of oyer and termfqei} and
** genera!, gaol dclirery held in ami; for the
" county of the city of DtfWin in thfit part of
" the kihg's. courts Bublii) where the court of
" king's bencl^ nsnaHy sits on Monday t^e
** l?6tF?day of October In the ye^ of opr Lord
'' G^d one thousand seven hundred and ninety
" five afld • in tic thirty-sixth y^ar qff the reign
«* of our scrvereigij lord George the Thirf king
" of Great Brt^in France and" Ireland Ite-
" fender qf the Faith and soforth before Wil-
" liam Wdri}iington lord mayor of the sajd
" city Michael ^ith esq. one of the barons
of his majesty's court of exchequer in the
said kifi^a:^ of Irelfcnd MajMaa- FinuciUic
esq. one Qf tlie. ju^^iqea of h\9 ^ ityyiM^flt
cou^t of CoinmoD Pleas iQ> the^ saidl kingr.
"dom of Irejwid i^ Dew Q«orge e«|..
" one other of th.e bfbrons qf iheiSiid.qaiirl. of
exch^Marintbe l$iqgdom.ofkalan4^ a»d
others,, %heixi feOow ju$tiiie» and cooHoi^-^
sioners of our said lord^tbekiAgr in and for
the whole county of the said city of JMdin
a^igoie;! by.thet Jattfera. patent, of our:saidl
lord the king under the great. seaH. of hi&
said kingdom of Irela^ bearing dale 9t
^< DuUio the 9fnh)day. of Jufw in the first
'f . year of the leign of our said! ki«d Ibck king
<* diverted t^ Paifick HamilU>niesq..the.tibfn
<<'H»rdi«ayprof^\bMaid city of , £)i^ltv> and
<^ the lov4#iiA?^ dfltie^ said cUy. foKibaitioie

'MbaMoraiskg. chancellor, of fhcv kifigdeati of
<< Ireland, and the chancellor of theeoidiloMl

tt
tt

€t
tt

tt
tt

tt
•tt
tt
It
tt

S29j

Jama WMonfif Kgh TriasoH.

A. D. 1793.

tS30

-4*

M

» t^ tciil^ of the said kinedotn for the time
** beii^ Cnaworth earl of Meath itiehard earl
** (*f WMB Hiimpht^y earl of Laocsborowgh
^ Rieliard lord viscotmt Flt« WiMiam sir Wil-
<* fMik York then behi^ chancellor of the
<■ toUrt of exchequer of the said lutd the Mng
«< Of his said kingdom of Ireland and the
'' chancellor of the said lord the kmg of his
cdtfrt of exchequer for the time being Vfar-
6m Flood thfn being chief justice of the
<j6uH dfdnef place olour said lord the kiojg
** hi Ins iiaid kingdoni and the chief Justice
** of his ^d tdlirt of dtief place for the titoc
^ being BSdttid Rigby then master of the
" TcHs In the add kingdom and the master of
^ the i^^ in the sAid kingdom for the time
^ being Ricfaard Aston then beingchief justice
^ (^ the court ofCommon • pleas of our said lord
^ the kiltg m the said kingdom and th^ chief

* justice of the court of Common-nleas for the
" time being £dward Willis then bcinft chief
^ batoti of the court of ^xcheoUet of tne Said
*^ iotd the king and the chier baron of the
^ ^d court otExcbeauer for the time being
'^ Rkhard Mouhtney then being second baron
^ 6f the said court of Exchequer Arthur Daw-
^ son then being third baron of the said
^ court bf exchequer Robeit French then be-
*■ iog second justice of the said court ofCora-
^ num picas Robert Marshall then being third
^ jfustite of the said court of Common-pleas

* Cnrlstopher Robinson then being second
« fuSticc of the said court of Chief Place Wil-
«* USLth dcott dien being third justice of the
« said court of Chief Place and the jtislices of
** the said courtsof ChlefPlace, and Cothmon-
^ tIfcatSy and the barons of the said court of
•• btcfaeaoer respectively for the time bdng
^ afid others in the em letters named to in-
^ guih! by the oaths of good and lawfVil men
^ df the said county of the city of Dublin
^Ind by other ^ys means and methods
^ tllietfeof the truth may the better be known
^ 99 well within hberties as wittiocft of all
^ tretsOkis misprision of treason insurrec-
** tfoDB tefoellions counterfeits clippinj^ wash-
^ iboi hidawftil coinings and other falsifying
^ ofmon^ of Great Britain or other money
-^ eutrent m the said kingdom of Ireland by
^ nroclamations bumiugs and of ftU murders
^Iblonles manslaughters kiTlings robberies
^ bttfglaries perjuries forgeries rapes unlaw-
^ fuf assemblies extortiohs oppressions riots

* routs crimes contempts deceits injinies es-
^ capes and other ofifences and causes what-
^ soever sis well again^ the peace and com-
^ txKfti law of the said kingdom of Ireland as
** against the fonn and effect of any statute
^ act ordinance or provision theretouird made
^ ordained or confirmed by any person 6r per-
^ sons within the said county of the city of
^ IhlbRn in any wise done comttiitted or per-
^ petraCted or thereafter to be done committed
^ or perpetrated and of all accessaries to the

* im offences and every of them within thp
** said coonty of the city of Dublin as well
^ ^thin liberties as without by whomsoever

t

** and howsoever had done perpetrated or
*• omtmittcd by any person or persons upon
" anv person or persons at any time howso^
" ever and in any manner whatsoever, ami
" that We said treasons and othct the pt-emises
" to heir examine discuss try finish exccutj^
^ ahd determine according to the lav^s anc]
^ custoins of the said kingdom of Ireland ahd
" to deliver the gaol of Newgale in tlic county
" of the Said city of Dublin of all the prisoners
** and raalefaetorti therein as of\en as occa-
" ^on should requwc. It is presented iij>oi|
^ the oath of twelve eood andlawfbl men of
"ttj^body of thesald county of the city of
''DtdHin wliose liamcs here follow that is
«* to say Robert Powell Daniel Dickenson
** JaHies Mills Andrew Callage Hall Liimb
^ Jaihcfs Blacker Richard Wilson William
** Henry Archer Joshua Mandcrs Robert
'^Hauna Francis Hamilton Mai-k BlojLliam
"l^wes Hodgson John Gortiian \Viiliam
• tvans Robert Newell William Lindsey
■William Berry John Duncan William
■Cfombie William Duncan Richard Crau-
'< field Bladen Sweny in manbet and form
** here fbllowiog that Is to say

County oj the City I " The jurors of our
of Dublin, to tDit,\^ lord the king uoon
" tiieir oath present that an open and public
<' Wat on the 20th day of August in the
** thirty-fifth year of the reign of our sovereign
" lord Geo^ge the third by the grace of God
** of Great Britain Trance and Ireland king
^^ defbifdef of the faith and soforlh and Ion£
" before was and ever since hitherto by land
^ and by sea and yet is carried on and prose-
•* Cuted by the persons exercising the powers
'' of government in Frahce, ae;ainst our most
'' serene ilhistrious and excel^nt prince our
** $aid lord the now king and that Janies
<* Weldbn, of the city of Dublin veomao in
** the said county of the citv of^^ Dublin s
" Subject of out said lord the king of hia
^ kingdom of Ireland well knowing the pre*
^ mises but not having the fear of God in taia
*' heart nor weighing tne duty of his allegiance
■ and being inoved and seduced by the instt-
^ gation of the devil, as a false traitor of our
^ said lord the king his supreme true lawful
** and undoiibted lord the cordial love and true
^ obedience which every tnie and dutiful sub-
** ject of our said sovereign lof d the king towards
^ him our said lord the kingshould bear wholly
*' withdrawing and contriving with all his
** strength Infcndin'g the peace and cohimoa
^ trancpdlity of this Kingdom oflreland to dia-
** tvttb and the government of our said lord the
** king of ^his his Kii^gdom of Ireland to
^ subvert and our said lord the king from the
^^egal st^te title honour (Kiwer imperial
'* cx*own and govei'nmcnt of this his kinkdom
** of Ireland to depose and deprive and our
<' said k)rd the king to deaih and finjil des-
«' traction to bring he the said James Weldo*
'« on the 20th day of August in the thirty-fifht
^ year of the feign of our said loxd the king

231]

S6 6EOAGE UL

Trials of the D^/mderS'-

L9S8

C(
<<
i€
(C

I

u
<(

t€

it

U

u
tt

€t
tt
U
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
it
U
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
t(
it
tt
tt

tt

tt

tt

tt

€t

tt

tt

<t

tt

tf

<C

it

it

tt

tt

it

it
tt

4<

tt
it
it
tt
ti
<t
ft
tt
U
it

u
<t

it
ti
it
4(

and on .divers other days and times as well
before as afler that day at Sufiblk-sUeet in
the parish of St. Andrew in the city of
Dubhn, and in the county of the said city
of Dublin aforesaid with force and
arms falsely wickedlv and tiaitorously did
compass imag^e ana intend the said lord
the king then and therehis supreme true and
lawful lord of and from the royal state
crown title power and government of this
his realm of Ireland to depose and wholly
deprive and the said lord the kin^ to kill
and put to death and that to fulfil and
bring to effect > his most evil wicked and
treasonable imaginations and compassines
aforesaid he the said James Weldon as sucn
false traitor as aforesaid and durins the said
war between our said lord king ana the said
persons exercising the powers of government
m France to wit on the said 20th dav of Au-
gust in the thirty-fifth year of the reign
aforesaid at Suffolk-street aforesaid in the
parish aforesaid and in the county of the
city of Dublin aforesaid with force and arms
falsely maliciously and traitorously did join
unite and associate himself to and with di-
vers false traitors to the jurors unknown and
did then and there with such false traitors to
the jurors aforesaid unknown enter into and
become one of a party and society formed and
associated under the denomination of De-
fenders with design and for the end and
purpose of aiding assisting and adhering to
the said persons so exercismg the powers of
government in France and so wagine war as
aforesaid against our said sovereign lord the
now king m case they should mvade or
cause to be invaded this his kingdom of Ire-
land and afterwards and dunng the said
year between our said lord the king and.
the said persons so exercising the powers
of government in France and enemies
of our said lord the king on the 20th day
of Aueust in the said 351 h year of the
reign of our said lord the king and on divers
other days as well before as after that day
with force and arms at Suffolk- street afore-
said in the parish of St. Andrew aforesaid
and county of the said city of Dublui afore-
said he the said James Weldon as such false
traitor asaforesaid infui thcr prosecution of his
treason and traitorous purposes aforesaid did
with divers other false traitors whose names
are to the jurors of our said lord the
kins as yet unknown then and there meet
and assemble to confer treat and consult
for and about the adhering to joining aiding
and assisting of the said persons exercising
the powers of government in France as
aforesaid and being enemies of our said lord
the king as aforesaid in case they should
invade mis his kingdom of Ireland and af-
terwards to wit on the twentieth day of Au-
gust in the thirty-fifth year of the reien afore-
said and on divers other days as well before
as after that day with force and arms at Suf-
folk-street aforesaid in tiu' parish of St.

*^ Andrew aforesaid in the cit^ of Dublia
" aforesaid and county of the citv of Dubtia
^' aforesaid the said James Weldon as tuch
^ false traitor as aforesaid in further prasccur
'^ tion of his treason and traitorous mirooses
'^aforesaid did then and there witn oivera
*' other false traitors whose names to the said
'' jurors are yet unknown wickedly and trai-
*< torously associate and unite himself to and .
** with divers false traitors unknown to the
'< jurors aforesaid and did alone with . said
*^ false trsutors to the jurors uoresaid u&-
^' known enter into and Mcome one of a party
<' and societ^f united and associated under the
'* denomination ofdefenders with design and for
<^ the end and purpose of deposing subverting
'^ and .overturning tbeeovernmentof this kin^
" dom as by law established and so associat^i
*' and united as aforesaid did then and there
" and on divers other days and times as welt
^* before as after that day meet and assemble
'' to confer consult and deliberate on and
'^ abgut the means and measures for effecting
*' his aforesaid traitorous and nefarious de-
'' signs and purposes. And afterwards to wit
'* on the said 20th day of August, in the
'* said thirty -fifth year of the reign aforesaid
'^ and on divers other days and times as well
'' before as after that day with force and arms
'' at Suffolk- street aforesaid in the parish of
" St. Andrew aforesaid, and county of the city
*^ of Dublin aforesaid the said James Wef-
** don as such false traitor as aforesaid in fur-
" ther prosecution of his treason and traito*
" rous purposes did then and there with divers
'* other false traitors whose names to the said
'' jurors are yet unknown wickedly and trutor-
'* ously associate and unite with divers other
^' false traitorsto the saidjurorsasyet unknown
*' and did along with such false traitors to
" the jurors aforesaid unknown enter into
'* and become one^ of a party and society
" united and associated under the denonu-
" nation of Defenders with design and for
" tlie end and purpose of subvcrUng and
" overturning the protestant religion in this
" kingdom by law established and so asso*
^* ciated and united as aforesaid did then and
'' there on divers other days and times as well
'^ before as after that day meet and assem-
'< ble with divers false traitors to the iurors
" as yet unknown confer consult and dell-
'' berate on the means and measures for
" affecting his aforesaid traitorous and nefii-
'* rious design and purposes and afterwards
** to wit on the said 20th day of August
" in the said thirty - fifth year of the
" reien aforesaid and on divers other days as
•' well before as after that day with force and
" arms at Suffolk-street aforesaid in the pa-
" rish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the ciu of
'< Dublin aforesaid and in the county of the
" city of Dublin aforesaid the said James
<< Weldon as such false traitor as aforesaid in
" farther prosecution of his treason and trai^
" torous purposes aforesaid and then and there
<' with divers false traitors whose names to

Jamei Wdbnjbt Hurh' Treason.

898]

ttxe aid. juiQKs are yet unknown wickedly
and tnulorously in order to enlist «nd iiro-
cuce one William Lawler who aiding ana as*
aisting to the said persona so exercising the
powers of government in France and ene*
mies of our said lord the king as aforesaid
in case they should invade or cause to be
invaded this his kingdom of Ireland did
then and there traitorously administer ^an
unlawftil oath to the said William Lawler
to the purport following that is to sav— ' I
' am conoemedd — So am I. — ^Witli who ^-«•
' WMth the National Ccmventiois meaning
' thereby the NationalConvention of France^
' — ^What is your designs P-^n freedom^ —
' Where is your designs ?— The foundation
' ofitisgroundedinarock.— Whatisyourde-

< sums ? — Cause to queal all nations, dethnMie
' all — gs (meaning thereby all ,kin^))

* to plant the true religion in, the hearts^

* be just. — Where did the cock crow when

* the whole world heard him?— In France.
' — ^What is the pass word ? — ^Eliphismatis'
And afterwards to wit on the said twentieth
da^ of August in the thirty-fifth year of the
rpign aforesaid and on divers other days as
weU before as afier that day with force and
arms at Suffolk-street aforesaid in the parish
of St. Andrew aforesaid in the city oi Dub-
lin aforesaid and county of the citv of Dublin
aforesaid the said James Weldonassuch
false traitor as aforesaid in farther prosecu-
tion of his treason and traitorous purposes
aforesaid did then and there witn divers
other false traitors whose names to the said
jurors are yet unknown wickedly and trai-
torously in order to enlist corrupt and pro-
cure one William Lawler to be aiding and
assisting to the said persons so exercisins
the power of government in France ana '
enemies of our said lord the king as afore-
said in case they should invade or cause to
be invaded this his kingdom of Ireland
and to bind and engage himself thereto did
then and there traitorously administer to
and instruct the said William Lawler to re-
hearse and repeat an oath the said James
Weldon having then and there for that pur-
pose sworn him the said William Lawler a
certain profession declaration and catechism
to the purport following that is to say

* I am concerned. So ami. — With who ? —

* With the National Convention (meaning

< thereby the National Convention of

* France).— What is your designs t — ^On

* freedom. — Where is your designs? — ^The
' foimdation of it is grounded in a rock. —
' What is your designs? — Cause to queal all

* nations, and dethrone all gs (meaning

' thereby all kings), to plant the true rcli-

* gion in the hearts — be iust. — Where did

* the cock crow when all the world heard

* him ? — ^In France. — What is the pass-
' woird^ — Eliphbmatis/ And aflcrwards to
wit on the said SOth day of August in the
said 35th year of the reign aforesaid and on
divers other days as wellbcfore as aft^r that

A« D. 1795.

[8S4e

a
it
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
It
u
it
u
<c

M

«
u
u

u

€€

it

n
ti
*t
u
tt
ti

<c
it
u
u
tt
tt
(«
it
tt
it
it
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
ti
tt
u
tt
tt
tt
tt
u
u
It
tt
tt
tt

*' di^ with force and MrmA at Sullblk-street
** aforenid in the parish <^St Andrew albre-
** said in the city of Dublin aforesaid and
** county of the city of Dublin aforesaid the
*^ said James Weldon as such false traitor as
*< aforesaid in farther prosecution of his trea-
** son and traitorous purposes aforesaid dkl
^' then imd there with divers other false tiai-
*' tors whose names are to the said jurors
" as yet unknown wickedly and traitorously
'' in order to encourage corrupt procure and
'< enlist the said William Lawler to become
** one of a party and society tomed for the
'< purpose of subverting the government of
'< this kingdom of Ireland as by law csti^
'* blished aid then and there traitorously en-
^ courage corrupt procure and enlist the said
" William Lawler to join himself to and be-
« come one of a party or society formed and
** united for the purpose of subverting the go-
" vernment of the kingdom of Ireland as by
'^ law established and afterwards to wit on the
'* S5th day of August in the said d5th year of
" the reign aforesaid and on divers other days
'' as well before as aAer that day with force
''and arms at Suffolk-street aforesaid in the
'* parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the city
'^ of Dublin aforesaid and in the county of the
" city of Dublin 'aforesaid the said James
" Weldon as such false traitor as aforesaid in
" fartlier prosecution of his treason and trai«
'' torous purposes aforesaid, did then and tliere
" with divers other false traitors whose names
to the said jurors are yet unknown wickedly
and traitorously in order to enlist and pro-
cure one William Lawler to be aiding imd
assisting to the persons exercisine the
powers of government in France ai^a ene-
" mies of our said lord the king as aforesaid
'' in case they should invade or cause to be
" invaded this his kingdom of Ireland did then
" and there traitorously administer an unlaws
'* ful oath to the said William Lawler to tlie
'* purport following that is to sav — ' I William
Lawler, of mv own goodwill and consent,
do swear to pe true to his majesty king
'' ' George the third, whilst I live under the
*' ' same government — More, I swear to be
" * true, aiding and assistant to every brother
<< < bound to me by this application^ and in

< every form of article from its first foundar

< tion, January 1790. — And in every amend-
' raent hitherto— And will be obedient to
' my committees, superior commanders,
' and officers, in all lawful proceedings and

<< < not otherwise, nor will I consent to any
^ * society or any brother of an unlawful
'' ' character, but will observe and obey the
« < la.ws and regulations of my committee to
'' ' whom I belong determined brother^ nor
'' ' in any violation of the laws, but to pro-
'* ' tect my life and jproperty, and the hves
« * and properties of my brothers — ^And I
*' ' will subject myself to my committee men
'' ' in all lawful proceedings and not otherwise
'' ' during the reign uf his majesty king George
^ * the t?urd| whilst I live under tne same

((

it
it
it
it

tt

it i

3 $]36 GEORGE III.

Q^Md Dg^lMfeyv^

\93B

a

m

M
<•

U
M
9t

U
41

n

4$

II

§4

a

41

fi

4C

4#

« ^wmwitm I Ukewrite svrebr t will nmet

* 'wtiMi and where tny OMomUlnee witt please,

* afid iflU spend wkal is pleaKteg to prest-
f AeM and oMipMiy**-! will tiol ^uftrrel tiot-
<«tt4ke Miy penon wKateomever, kaowios

* him to be sotls bm will Hve lovhaglv end

* friendly with ereery one WAder thst oeAo-
< t«meiioa-«^i wi41 not Hse eny fight ^ quar-
«tel <m acoeuiil of my present itttnis, or

* back that for unto my biiytherbood/ And
the said jtireve of our said lord the kingupon
their oath fatlher present Ihet an open and
puMc wBir on the sidd 90tb day of Autust
m ^86th yeor of the itign of our said lord
Oeoi^) tbe third and solorth and loi^ be-
fbttifid ever elaoe hitherto by knd and b^
eea htith been and beitfried on and pro^e-
euted by the said peiaons eierdsing the
powetB of govemmeut m France against our
nost serene illustriens end excellent prince
Cleorge the third now king of Ireland and
eofbrSk And that the said James Weldon
a sdUect of our s»d lord the king of his
kingiJom of Ireland well knowing the pre-
mises not having the fear of God in his
fieart nor weighing tiie duty of his allegiance
but bdng movea and seduced by the in-
etimtion of the devil «s a false tniitor
agamst our most serene'ssid ilhtstrrous and
excellent prince Oeoree the third now king
of Ireland and sofortn and contriving and
with idi his strength intending the peace of
tl]^his kingdom of Ireland to disturb and
the co^mment of this his kingdom of Ire-
faLndTto subveft he the said James Weldon
on the SOtfi day of August in the thirty-fifVh

ear of the reign of our said lord the now
me and on mvers other days and times as
weH befbre as after that <lhty with force and
arms at SofFoIk -street aforesaid in the ptnsh
of St. Andrew aforesaid in the ci^of Dublin
aforesaid and countv of the said city of Dub-
fiu aforesaid nniawrully and traitorously was
adhering to aidine ana comfbrting the per-
sons exensising the powenr of government
ill Ffance and oetng enenrietfof om* said lord
the king as aforesaid and that in the prose-
cttUon performance and execution of the
aaid tmrtorons adhermg; of him the said
Jamee Weldon to the persons exercising the
powers of sovemment in France and i^ing
enemies of our said lord the present kmg to
wit on tfaeeaid 90th day of August in the
said tbirtv-fiflh year of the reign aforesaid
at SoflblK-street aforesaid m the parish
aforesaid and in the county of the city of
Dublin aforesaid with force amd arms fifdsely
nudkfousl;^ and tiaitomusly did join unite
and associate himseif to and with divers
fklse traitofv to the jurors as yet unknown
and did then and therewith aUcb folse trai-
tors to the jafors aforesaid aa vet unknown
enter into and beoDme one of a party and
society formed and associated under the de-
nomination of Defonders with de8n;n and for
the purpose of aiding assisting andadhering
to the said persons so exercismg ttie powers

••yea
^Kn

" of go>i^rMttetit In Aahee and so wMbg War
^ a* aforesaid with w& told severe^ lofil the
** now king in case they sfaooM invade tfr cause
*< to be invaded this hl!S kingdom of Itefatm
^ and af^twatds and duting; the said war be-
''tween our said lotd the king and the said
** persons so exercising the powers of govcro-
'( ment in txtAct and enemies of out- mm) lord
«' the king ota the 90th day of August In the
*< said thiHy^fif^h year of the releti bf our said

* brd the king and on divers other days as
^ well before as afler tlat day wHh force and
** armt at6offolk*-street afore^d In the parish
** of St. A-bdrew aforesaid and county of the
^ said citv of Dublin aforesaid be the taid
" James Weldon as such false traitot asafore-
^ said in fkrther prosecution of his treaaoH and

* trait(Qrrou9 purposes afbresidd did with ^eia
^ other folse tr^tors whose names af% to the
^Murors of our said lord the kita^ In yet un-
" known then and there meet andassemble to
^ confer t^eat and consult for atid about the
** adhering to Joining aiding and ss^stln^ of
** the said pefsons exercisiim the powers ot go«
** vemment in France as amresaid and bemg
'' enemies of our said lord the king as afof e-
^ said in case thrjr should invade or cause to
'< be invaded thb nis kingdom of Irdand.*

The same overt acts were stated In support
of the second count, add in the same manner
as set forth in the fim.--The indictment con-
cluded in this way—'' agaitnt the duty of the
allegiance of the said ^mes Weldon against
the peace of our said lord the king hb
crown and dignity and against the form of
the statute in such case made and provided.^

CUrk ^ <A^ Cnwa.— How say you, lames
Weldon, are you guilty of this treason in
manner and form as you stand indicted and
arraigned or not ^

Mr. iii<lfa%.— My lords^ I submit to your
lordsfafps that this hidictment must be Ouash-
edy the caption annexed to it being mtail
both as to form and substance. The mt
error that amiearB upon the fA:e of the cap-
tion, is that It lays no venue ; it does not show
whether the blH was found by the msoA jury
ofthecityorofthe county of Ddbnn. 1 am
aware that by a statute this court b taken to
be intheciwandthecoun^j looalfy it Ds in
the county of DiMn; artinciaffy it Is in ei-
ther; but the caption doestrot set forth any
eouimr m the roarghi: if it did, I adniit, it
might be unnecessary to repeat ihajt oouniy m
the caption ; but adi tbati^ suted in Ae body
of the caption is, ''^ the place where Kii^a-
bench asually sits(^ witfvout averring it to bo
or the city of Dublin, where the oflbnce is
aupposed to be committed. 2ndly. The c^
tSon stales an adjournment of a sefi^n, bil
does not state when the orij^nal seadkm be-
gan, Str. B6S. Sf Hawk. 301. SMXy. It does
not state that the grandjury were sjPbm and
charged, 4 B!. Com. Post. 4** S Hd. P. C

* Vd, 15 p. 3d3 of tins CoBettiOtl.

887}

Jamet- WtUtmJbr High Tremon,

JLD. 179&

[S9B

16t. 9u6b(K— ^-^The a^lioo ^Mfi» thftlit

b presented upon the oath of twelve
that is to say, and it sets out the names of
twesty three ; this is repugMllt, for the latter
part b contradicloiy to- \& firmer. 4My.
The caption does not state the additions of
the jurors; the precedent iatb^ appendix to
4. BL Ci»q^ states the foreman, to bea baroael
and the rest are esquires. The necessity of
the addition is obvious ; It is to ascertain the
ideottty o^the grand juror, for many objec-
tions may lie against him, be might be an
cMtiaVy convicted of treason or leloay. and
coQaccyaeDtly disabled 6om sccmd^ upon a
graoAjury.

Mr. AUarntjf Giner^ roaa to answer
these objections bvt was slopfied by the
Court,

Mr. Justice CAoffi&rrifttn.^-The court do not
think the objections founded. It b taken for
granted, that the caption b pari of the indict*
menl; it is^not; it is only, the siyb of the
couilt, and where captiona. have been qiusbed
it ha» beea upon ^ettiorarif or writ of, enor.

Tlie prisoner then pleaded in abatement—
^ And the said James Weldon says, that be
is not a yeoman, but a soldbr ki his majesty's
7lh mgiment of dragoons."

Mr, Attorney G^mrtir^l daauir to this
plea.

Mr. Jjislice CAinn^r/afii.--Tbeii you admit
thai h» b. not a yeoman^

Mr MtorHey GemrtU^'^l^ike' pteaso my
loud? I had misoonceived it4

[Then the ptea was read, and afler some
conference among the counsel for the
crown, Mr. Attorney -^neral replied, and
averred ^ that the pusoner. is a ** yeo-
* nianV and this he pcayed might be

tried' by the countryj ^The counsel

for the prisoner, joined the similiter —
^ And the said Jaau% Weldon. doth so.
likewise,']

CaKr^^-^YouprBy-tbautuai pracesi?

Cmtnttixm both sides said, cortaisly ; and
the attomc¥ general prayed tha« a jpiy might-
he ratumed imttantof.

It then^became a qucwtwn to whailiiiia the
fdba ndaiedl^wholher it maant^thai he was
a soldier at the time whenthe plea-was put in-^
4vaithe' tamo when the indbtmantwaafound ?

Mr^Carran^-^Themtaning'of the pKea tt^
that tbepeitaner iwvtr wasa '^ yedman'^ either'
at the tune of hb ants^ the'timethe indict-
xnaat was taken, or at this dayi Kb a' son of
dvaclbn to the identity, that ha b not^the
man prescolcd by the grand inquest t» a
** yieoinan/' for he- is ai soMiev*

A.paad wb4 then returned by th» sheriff
*^ and twelve persons were' sworn to try the
beuei whether the prisoner bd'a^^ y«»nian<'^

Mr. Attm-Jtey Oenera/.-— Gentlemen of the
jucjt The pisenerbiadtetad'fop- high trea-
aon, and lie w dcscribtdin the hMKetment as
as^ yeoman i'' an issue b' Qaw> joined npon'
thai :deacHt>don. and if it be>found4br hii!i>
the indictment must be quashed.

The 1^ rdqnbes, tblt «a indictmeBt mint
set forth whaia party b ; the prisoner b des^
cribed aa a yeomaa ; we shall produce a wit*
ness to show what he isy and yon witi deter-
mwe whether he be a <^ yeoonoi," or not* The
direction baafnvobuaaa can be eonc9Edved ;
it M adiagttce to justbe that soch objectiona
are aUewed, and I sagr tfaaa to sbmw yon that
if there be any donbt in the case, you will
lean against the plea. What wav tlub aann-
ii^ of the YiatA** yomWD!* §sm yean ago^ or
what was the awaDing oi the Saaon wocd^
/^tcomfaea^ b.nat now ttve swkgectetf inqafary.
We will ahow that the prboner b- a saldicr n»
aragUEneatef horse; and the words nawMfic
and labourer have been applied kidi&reBt^
aa snffiotent deaenptions ef pevaona in ftiia ai-
toatioiik

Theconasel for the prboner may shew fronv
bbckbtter books, what was the neaahig e^
the word ** yaaaaan'^ ontny yaats^tgo ; has if
is sufficient to desoabe a mart to a» eammoai
intent, and. m the knowO'ase' «^ wnrda at
the tkne of the indktnent found. The wont
'* yeoman'' ia applied to aan^ different situw*
tions, asa person having land' and^ entitled tior
serve upon a jury. If tliat be theawpfopttated*
meaning, it has- not been so taken Iwlely.
There are yeomen of the kine'^ gaanla>--ao aira
tbeatteadantaupon the bui Ueut^naiiiV per*
80% and a varbl^ of otbaia in dHTerent aitlia^
tioDs. Therefore the MKigofficanr weed eaanot
be now made a ground <^ ol^ectien, tbbt man
bans described with, aufficient partyonbnff .
Anobjeotion might be made te Hf description
of a man aa one kind* of artiticeis when m
truth he was of anethei^ but* the same ehjeo-^
tiou cannot be made te the wevda ynmaia^ ev
/dhMirer;

Tresham^ Greggy sworn. — Examined by^ Mr.
Frtme Serjeant [Jamet Fitfgeruld,^

Areyou gaoler of Ifewgate ?— -I am.
, Boyei^knew the ptl8onerPi--rknow. tfw
! prisoner, James Wektos^ since he wascem*-
mttted'to gaol.

How long since 19 that'?^^About » month.

Had jFOU' any conversation witb him }^—f
aahed^ him- what busineffS" he was of. He sakP
he was a breeohes maker fVom the eonrrty off
Meath, but that he had been- a soldbffoptwo^
years t-thal he wa» asoldierin the blaek-horsef
and was taken* in Cork. '

Tresham Gregg crossrexaulncd by Mr*.

CurroRn

By virtue of your oath, do you know whalf
ayaoiaait ia^F — ^I do not.

Mti CufTdm.— Then you may go down' 3.n&
inquire before' yea come- to prove that a pri«
doner ia^a yeoman.

Aere the evidence closed.

Mir. Garron.— Gentlemen of the jury. The*
law require» that there^ should be a detenm>*
nate degree of certainty in the specificaiittn,
not ottlj Of-every crme, ^lithr whkh any maef-

389] S6 GEOKOE III.

Ttialt of the Dffotiderf—

[240

is charged) but alsoof theperson charged ; and
itis not for us to say, that any certaiaty which
mBy be required in favour of life, or any ob*
jection permitted by the law, is frivolous, or
disgracefiul to the jurisprudence of the coun-
try. It is a known tet, that the certainty of
descripUdn which has been adhered to in this
countiy, has been departed from in a neigh«>
houring country, and hundreds of innocent
persons have penshed for want of it. ^ '

T|iis man b in^cted as 9,yeoman and if you
have any doubt upon the case, the uniwrm
principle of the law is, that in such case you
shotda lean in favour of the prisoner* Bui
g^ndemen^ there is no doubt in the case:
your oath is^ to try whether this man be a
ytmnun, Qur society is divided into different
degrees, and the inferior orders with regard to
one another, asid the peers who are above
them have correlative appellations. The name
ofyeomafi is a known and defined name. It
is not to black letter that I shall refer the
Court or to bo<^ that areas little known as the
pronunciation of the word; but to the<:om-
n^entaries.of judge Blackstone, who has not*
written man^ years ago. l Bl. Com. 406.
^ Aywnan is he that nath free land of forty
shilluigslby the year; who was anciently
thereby qualified to serve on juries, vote for
kpights of the ahire, and do any other act,
where the law requires one that is probui
4 legalis homo*** He adds in the ensuing pa-
iragraph, '^ the rest of the commonalty are
tradesmen^ artificers^ and labourers ; who fas
^ell as all others) must in pursuance of tne
sta^te 1 Uen. 4». c. 5. be styled by the name
and addition of their estate, degree, or mys-
^ry, and the place to which they belong, or
where they have been conversant, in all origi-
ginal writs of actions, personal appeab, and
tndictmenis upon which process ot outlawry
may be awarded ; in order as it should seem
to prevent any clandestine, or mistaken out-
lawry, by reducing to a ^ee^ certamfy the
person who is the qbject of its {Hrocess.'' Thus
distiueubhing the man of property in land,
from Uiose who earn money by trades as a
tradesman or artificer, who must be described
by their degree or mystery. From thb res-
potable authoritv and the plain sense of the
^ase, the jury will find fur the prisoner. You
are not to calculate consequenoes. If the man
is entitled to the benefit of the objection, you
are sworn to give it to him, and you are not to
depart from that oath upon bemg told, that
the objection b frivolous or disgraceful to jus-
tice.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain, — I wbh thai coun-
sel in speaking to this point, would argne,
whether we are to advise the jury upon the
common acceptation of the word, or whether
we are bound by the strict letter of the law ?

Mr. Baron George.^-^hakspeare seems to
have considered a soldier synonymous with
yeoman^ and Dr. Johnson in his second defini-
tion of the word, says, '' it seems to have been
anciently a kind qf ceremonious title given to

sbldiers ; whence we have still yeomen of the
g«ard."

'< Tall yeomen seemed they, and of gr^t might
*' And were enranged ready still for fight.7

Sp£NS£E.

- " you, good yednien.

<< Whose limbs were made in England, show

' us here,
" The mettle of your pasture"''

Shakspeake Hen* V.

Mr. Prime Serjeants — My lords, yeoman is
at thb day the. general description of a man
who is not a gentleman, or an esquire; for if
a man has acquired no addition from his
mystery, trade, or crafi, he is a yeoman. The '
rules of law must adapt themselves to the^
growing occasions of the times, and that man
will be effectually described as a yeomany who '
has acquired no other addition, by which he
could be discriminated. In common reason, it
is to be considered as the general description
of a man, who has not acquired any other. A ^
soldier mosLunquestionably cannot be a de-
scription under which a man could be in-
dicted. Burgess b not a good description,
nor is citizen^ nor servant, neither can a sol-*
dier be, because it is not general enough upon
which to arraign a man.

Mr. SoUciior General [John Tbler, after-
wards lord Norbury and Lord Chief Justice of
the Court of Common Pleas}^— The single

Question is^ whether under the statute of ad- •
itions, lUen. 5, this description be suffi-
cient ? The authority of Shakspcare and John-
son is decisive to show, that a soldier is* a
yeoman. S Inst. 668, If a man be named a
yeoman, he cannot abate the writ. Is .this
such a name as the prisoner may be known
by? He has given no evidence of his being
of any art or mystery, and it is impossible for
those concerned for the crown to know in all
cases the true art or mystery of a person ac-
cused. 'Before the statute of Hen. 6, no de-
scription was necessary, and it was ekiacled to
remove objections made in outlawries. But
where a party is forthcoming, the argument
is done away. Teaman is a generic term, in-
cluding many degrees, and is fully sufficient
to answer the intention of the statute.

Mr. Saurin same side.— This plea is foimdcd
upon the statute of additions, by which it was
provided that persons indicted, should h^ de-
scribed either Dy their state and degree, or by
their mystery or trade, if they were of any
myslenr or trade. Ever since the^atatutewas
enaUed, it has been in the option of the pro-
secutor to describe the person accu^d by his
rank; or by his trade; it b not necessary to
describe him by both. From lord Coke's ar-'
gument upon the statute it appears thiat state
or degree mean one knd the same thins;
" The state or degree wherein a subject stand-
eth.'* There Are many persons who . haTe.iio
tradet and who must be described i by some
ranlci A aoMier is no trade^ and he stands

841]

James WeUonfor H^h Treason^^

A. D. 1795.

E34S

in the nature of a iervant taken into the pay
of the crown, and does not come within the
description of fftysfery or trade, a servant is
not of any mystery or trade. See then the
alternative offered to the prosecutor. Where
a partv has no trade or mystery, he must be
described by his state or degree in the com-
munity. What are they ? If under the rank
of nobility, they are divided into baronets^
knights, esquireSi eentlemen, and yeomen,
and there is no other description under the
rank of nobility bv which he could be de-
scribed. Here we nave shown that this roan
was not of a trade by which he could be de-
scribed, and therefore he must be described
by bis rank and condition, that is a yeoman ;
ami if be be not a jreoman, of what other rank
IS he? A yeoman is the lowest rank in the
community. Between fenileman and yeoman^
there is not a clear hne of distinctioui by
which a gentleman could plead in abatement,
if indicted as a yeoman. In confirmation of
this, I appeal to the uniform usage for many
jears, during which numbers have been de-
scribed as yeomen f where they were not. of
higher rank in the community. Therefore I
sobmit, that it isrincumbent upon your lord-
ships to. inform the jury, that upon the evi-
dencei the rank of this man is not higher than
that of & yeoman ; that there is sufficient evi-»
dence to show that he is of that inferior rank^
and no evidence to show he is of any higher.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain, — Is there any pre-
cedent of an indictment describing a man as
a soldier?

Mr. Justice Fimteane. — ^It appears firom
Kelyng that" sailor" is a good addition, and
Hawkins in explaining thq word mystery, says
art, trade, or occupation,

Mr. Kells and Mr. Ruxton said a few words
on the part of the prosecution. There being
no precedent of an indictment against a man,
as a toiditTf was a strong argument to show
it was no good addition ; ana as to sa'i/or, it
tnay be observed, that it is a sort of mystery,
foT ssdlors serve a recular apprenticeship.

Mr. Justice Ckamferlain, — ^The inclination

of some of the court, ^indeed I may say

it is, at present, the opinion of all the court,
that yeoman within the common acceptation
of the word, is a sufficient description of the
person : — We mean to tell the jury so, and
after that to adjourn the court, and take the
opinion of all the judges this evening ; and in
case we should be wrong in the opinion now
given, we shall take their advice how to pro-
ceed.

Gentlemen of the jury ; — ^The issue you
are to decide upon is, — ^Whether the prisoner
is Sk yeoman according to the strict legal dei-
uition of the word f — ^Upon the authority of
judge Blackstone, who is certainly a very high
.autnority in the law, the prisoner does not
appear 'to be a yeoman. But according to
tne best writers in the English language, he
is a yeoman. ** It seems to have been an-
ciently a kind of ceremonious title given to

VOL. XXVI.

soldiers, whence we have still yeomen of the
guard.*' Our present opinion is, that entitling
the prisoner by a general title of courtesy is
sufficient wiihin the statute of additions. All
society is divided into peers, baronets, knights
esquires, gentlemen, and yeomen^ tradesmen,
and artificers. At the time of finding this
indictment, which is the material time for
you to attend to, the prisoner was not an arti-
ficer. He liad been ored a breeches maker^
but two years before he had given up that and
became a soldier, so that, at the time of find-
ing the bill, he could not be entitled a trades-
man or artifice!^, nor a gentleman, nor an es-
quire. Therefore under the common accepta-
tion of the word, I think him sufficiently des-
cribed, and I am strongly fortified by this cir-
cumstance, that no precedent is produced
where a man is described as a " soldier'' in
an indictment. There may be a reason for
sailors, because they serve ah apprenticeship.
Upon the best English authorities ^eojnan is a
title of courtesy. If we are wrong in this
opinion we shall -be set right by the judges,
who will be summoned thisevemng.

The jury retired and after some deliberation
brought in a verdict, that the prisoner is a
yeoman.

The court immediately adjourned.

T\te$day, Bee. 23d. 1795.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain. — We are to inforrtK
the prisoner and his counsel, that nine of the
judges met at lord Clonmell's, and they were
unanimously of opinion, that the direction
given to the jury was right.

The p^soner then pleaded, Not Guilty.

The sheriiTs returned the panel, which
was called over in the following order :

Sir Edward Crofion, bart. sworn.

Sir James Bond, bart , challenged perempto-
rily by the prisoner.

William Bury, esq. sworn.

Hugh Carncross, esq. challenged perempto-
rily by the prisoner.

William Cope, esq. sworn.

Meredith Jenkin, esq. challenged perempto-
rily by the prisoner.

Morsan Crofton, esq. sworn.

Rawdon Hautenville, esq. sworn.

Thomas Howison, esq. set by on the part of
the crown.

Samuel Middleton, esq. challenged peremp-
torily by the prisoner.

Thomas Read, merchant, sworn.

William Sparrow, merchant, sworn.

Joseph Dickinson, esq. challenged peremp-
torily by the prisoner.

James French, esq. sworn.

William Galway, merchant, challcngei pe*
reroptorily by the prisoner.

Isaac Maunders, merchant, challenged pe-
remptorily by the prisoner,
R

3*3]

36 GEORGB III.

Trials ofl/ie Defenden—-

&A

John Minchio, merchant, challenged pe>

remplorily by the prisoner.
Simon Verpeyle, merchant, challenged pc-

remplorily by the prisoner^
Charles Henry Sirr,* esq. challenged pc-

• rem ptorily by the prisoner.
Ralph Mulbern, merchant, sworn.

Mead Nessbitt, merchant, setby on the part of
the crown.

Henry Pettigrew, merchant, sworn.

Thomas Prentice, merchant, set by on the
part of the crown.

Thomas Wilkinson, merchant, set by on the
part of the crown.

William Blair, merchant, sworn.

Thomas Palmer, merchant, challenged pe-
remptorily by the prisoner.

Goodwin PiUsworth, merchant, set by on
the part of the crown.

George Carleton, merchant, challenged pe-

• remptorily by the prisoner.
John Smithy mdrchant, sworn.

THE' JURY.

Sir E. Crofton bart.
William Bmry, esq.
William, Cope, esq.
Morgan, Croflon, esq.
R. Hautenville, esq.
T. Rcatd, mercht.

W. Sparrow, mercht.
Jas. Trench, mercht.
R. Mulherri, mercht
H. Petligrew, mercht.
W. Blair^ mercht.
John Smith, mercht.

The prisoner was then given in charge to
the jury by the clerk of the crown, who read
the whole indictment.

• Mt. Ruxton opened the pleadings.

Mr. Attorney General. — My lords, and gen-
tlemen of the jury; — In this case it will not
be necessary for me to do more ihan^Ute the
several circumstances which may be material
to explain the evidence that will be produced ;
and even this statement is rendered necessary
rather from the importance of the case, than
any difficulty which will occur. Were I to
ibllow my own discretion, the case is so simple
as to need no statement, but merely to pro-
duce the witnesses upon the table.

Gentlemen, the prisoner stands charged
with the highest crime known to the law ;
the indictment states two species of that
crime. 1st compassing and imagining the
death of the kmg:— 2nd)y. adhering to the
enemies of the king. Gentlemen, the charge
of compassing the death of the king, it may
be necessary to erplain in a few words ; very
few I shall use, because it will be the duty of
the court to explain to you, the law upon that
subject; therefore 1 shall only say so much
as will enable your minds to apply the evi-
dence to the charge stated in the indictment.
The law has made it a capital offence to com-
pass or imagine the death of the king. Our
mild laws, gentlemen, make the imagination
of no other offence penal; the crime must be
commflted in every other case. But the per-
son of the king is sacred. So much depends

* The celebrated Town Major of Dublin.

upon his life, that for the sake of ttie ^blic,
their tranquillity, the preservation et' their
lives and properties, the law has guarded the
life of the king in a peculiar manner. Any
act, which in its nature tends to bring the
life of the sovereign into danger, will support
the charge of compassing his death, it is not
necessary, that the party accused shall have
entertained the design of putting the king ta
actual death — of depriving him m life; — ^ft is
sufficient in the eye of the law, if the man has
determined to act in such a manner as to bring
that to pass. As to levy war; to change the
government, which cannot be undertaken
withoat hazarding the king's life ; to bring war
upon the kingdom roust expose his life, and
even though the party had, in his own mind,
predetermined not to put the king to death,yet
if he does those acts which endanger his life,
he is guilty. But, gentlemen, the law niiich
is thus careful of the sovereign's life, guards
with equal care the lives of the subjects,
who Tnay be accused of intending to com-
mit such a crime. Though the law makes
the imagining the king's death a crime,
yet it takes care that it shall be proved by
such circumstances as evince the fact ef the
hitention. There must be what is called an
(Tpert act stated upon the indictment; and
that overt act must be proved from which it
can be collected, that the design was taken l#
compass and imagine the kinj^s death.

The other species of treason with which the
prisoner is charged ist adhering to the ene*
mies of the king — to persons in a state of war
with these realms. Gentlemen, it is needless
to say any thing in explaining the nature of
this crime >-it speaks for itself. These, ge»>
tlemen, are the two charges, that he did
compass the king's death, and that he adhered
to the king's enemies. Adheringto the king's
enemies is evidence also ef the compassing of
the death of the king ; because it is impos-
sible to adhere to tl^ enemies of the king
without exposing that sacred life to danger.

G eh tlemen, I shall state the overt acts
which are to support these charges. There
are eight of them. If any one of them be
proved, and the inferaiice which the indict-
ment charges, be drawn from it, though there
be no evidence of the other seven, the priso*
ner must be found gtulty. The first overt act
states, that he associated with divers traitors
unknown, and became one of a party under
the denomination of ^* Defenden*' for the
purpose of assisting and adhering to the per«
sous exercising the powers of government m
France. Tlie second is, that he assembled
with others to consult about adhering to die
French. Thirdly, that he associated with per-
sons called *< Defenden " for the purpose of
overturning the government of this kingdom
as by law established. The fourth overt act
is, that he united with *' Defenders '^ for tb*
purpose of overturning the Protestant reli^

E'on. Fifthly, That he enlisted one William
iwler to aid tl>e persons exercising the

Mdj

James Wddonjir High Treason.

A. D. 1795.

[246

jwvers of goVermnent in Francei asid admi-^ 1 laws of the country. These commitlecs havQ
aistered to hio) an oath, upon which I shall [ e.xibted hi roany cuunlies of the kingdom, as^

'^' sociating the lower orders of the people, by
holding out. promises to seduce uneclucatecl
men ;--teUing the poor that they would eu-

presently make aome observations. The
sixth oreri act statet^ that he cnhsted Lawler
to adbeie W the French, should they invade
this kingdom^ and that he administered a car
techism for that purpose. The seventh is,
tbat be cfdistedy Gorrupted» and procured
Lawler lo become one of a party formed for
the purpose of subverting ihe government.
Bigbthy that be enhsted him for the purpose
of overturnii^ the ProtesUnt religion. Such,
gentlemen, are the fads to be proved against
the prisoner at the bar. I have stated the
ouiUnes of them. Some or one of them must
be proved W sustain the charge . The same
overt acts are laid as applicable to each of the
species of treason charged aga'mst the pri*
soner.

Having stated^ thus briefly, tlie charge and
the nature of it, it becomes ray duty tu state
Ihe evidence which will be produced to sus-
.tain that charge. Before, liowever, I enter
into the particulars of that evidence, it may
not be improper to call to your recollection
the state of things in this country at the time
this offence is alleeed to have been com-
fuiUed. In doing tnis, gentlemen, I shall
state what is a notorious historical fact — what
cannot be excluded from your minds — every
man in the communily must be impressed
witli it. — For some years there have e.xisted
in this country, a number of persons, asso*
elated for wicked, and atrocious purposes,
•styling themselves " DefenderitJ' They have
from time to time for the last four or five years
infested almost every pari of this, in that re-
spect, unhappy country. It has appeared in
various trials in the dinerent provinces, what
ihe nature of the association of those wretches
is : — it has apoeared with what designs they
associated, and though those who excited
them have not appeared to public view, yet
the manner of exciting them, and the object
are but too plain.

Since the year 1790, there have appeared
in many counties, particularly in the Northern,
Eastern and Western counties, many persons
under the denomination of *' Drfenders^^*
committii^ various outrages* and who have
directed their attempts most particularly to
4li8arm tbeir fellow subjects. It has appeared
in every investigation of this offence, that
there have been in various counties, a num-
ber of persons calling themselves ** Com-
mitiee Mm,^ who have guided the wretches
they had deluded, directed their actions, and
prescribed their movements; — pointea out
the different courses they were to takoj and
administered oat^, *' to be true and faithful
to the CamtmJtiee Men,'* — '* to obey the laws
of Ihe .committee in all things.*'~-and these
oaths they have guarded with such equivoca-
tions, that while they bound the parties to the
conmissiotn of the most atrocious crimes, the
oath should appear to be merely an oath of
allcgmce t9 %b«kipgi and submission io the

joy the properly of the ricq, that they were,
no longer to exist by Iheir industry, and re-
presenting what they knew must be impos-
sible, that all men were equal. If it were,
posbible that such equality could be effected,
the consequence would be the subversion of
all government, and that all would be reduced
to a savage state.

Such, gentlemen, were the topics held out.
In other places they propagated different
things, and they dared to use the sacred naniQ
of religion, — having no religion themselves, —
to forward the purposes of their wicked impo-
sition. It has appeared in loo many instances,
and I am shocked while I stale it, that these
miscreants endeavoured to instil hatred anct
animosity into the minds of their convert^
against their fellow christians, though differ7
ing in some speculative points, professing the
same religion, worshipping the same God, an(}
seeking redemption tnrou«h the same Jesus
Christ. They represented, that their Protes-
tant brethren were to be destroyed; and this
they attempted at a time when the legislature
has been session after session, endeavouring
to put them upon a footing with themselves,
to do away differences, and to put an end Iq
distrust— While I say this, gentlemen, let
no man imagine, that we mean to impute any
thing of this kind to the general body profes-
sing the Roman Catholic religion : No, gen-
tlemen, we attribute these abominable prac-
tices to others, who are seeking their own
impious views.— It is a subject so abhorrent
to my nature, that I would not have men- •
tioned it, but that it must come out in evi-
dence ; for I would not suffer a word to escape
my lips, that would tend to divide those, who
are bound to that law and that government
which we all enjoy.

The conduct oithe Committee Men is his-
torically known ; it is proved inConnaught^
it is proved in several counties of the North,
and in Leinstcr; and it is wonderful, that!
have seen circumstances proved in the most
distant parts of the west, corresponding
with circumstances arising in the distant
parts of the North and liast— manifest-
ing most clearly, that there was a united
scheme to subvert the religion and the go-
vernment of the country, by exciting sedition
among the lower orders of the peopTe. How
these schemes were set on foot so universally,
whether by French gold, or democratic clubs,
b neither for you, gentlemen, nor me now to
inquire— whether by the United Society ot
Dublin, or Belfast, I will not trouble you at pre-
sent with taking notice, or inquiring. I only
wish to impress upon your mmds, that it is a
fact historically known, that there does cxi^t
in the country such a scheme of rebellion and
insurrection.— Farther to forward this plan,

\

847] 36 GEORGE Ift

%hey have levied money from the poor wretches
they seduced; a man sworn pays a shilling to
the person administering the oath ; the Com-
mittee-man receives the shilling, and if he
swear many, the consequence is, a consider-
able income. In fact, the practice became
common, and they spoke of a Committee Man
in a village as they would of a shoe-maker.
** Where are you gomg ?" — '' To the Defender-
maker."— And to that Defender-maker the
person paid a shilling, as if he had obtained
somethmg valuable.

So far, gentlemen, it is necessary I should
slate these facts to you. I hope in doing so,
I do not overstep my duty. I do not mean to
^•ouse your passions upon this subject, and if
I did, I could not. The statement I have
made cannot affect the prisoner, unless it be
proved that he is such a man as is charged by
the indictment, and it was necessary to state
what I have, that you might understand the
dangers and proceedinjg;s of the " Defenders,''
which will be proved m evidence.

Gentlemen, the crime with which the pri-
soner is charged, is of the most awful nature
in its consequences both to him, and to the
public. The charge is this, that the man at
the bar is guilty of a crime, the end and ob-
ject of which was the destruction of the go-
vernment under which we live — the destruc-
tion of the life and liberty of every man living
under it— the destruction of our laws, which
have been the envy of every one for seven
hundred years. But this crime is greatly ag-

f;nivated, if it be capable of aggravation, by
he peculiar situation in which the prisoner
stood. The prisoner at the bar was, at the
.time when the offence was committed, a dra-
goon serving his majesty in the 7th regiment
of Guards, then in this city — placed in a situar
tion to defend his country— sworn in the pre-
sence of God, for whom he seems to entertain
,a profound reverence, to defend his king and
country. Such is the man, upon whose life
^our verdict is now to pass.

Gentlemen, having stated the situation in
Vhich he was placed, and the duty he parti-
cularly owed to his king and country— having
stated that he had solemnly sanctioned that
.dulv in the presence of his God, it is the less
probable that he should commit the crime. If.
nowever he shall have committed the crime,
,then he will be less an object of mercy.
Gentlemen, it will be proved, that this man
administered an oath to a person of the name
.of William Lawler, which oath went to bind
that person to be a « Defender ;"— and now
having mentioned the name of the person, who
is the witness for the prosecution upon this
trial, I shall state to you the nature of the
.^idence he is to give, and the manner in
which the crown became acquainted with the
vlesiens of the conspirators.

William Lawler, the witness, is a native of
this city ; he is by trade a guilder; served a
regular apprenticeship to that trade— af\cr
which he practised at it for some lime in this

Trials of the Defenders^

[S4g

city, and then went to London, whither
his father had removed. There he had
the misfortune, and it is common to others
as well as him, to read the words of that ce*
lebrated apostle, Mr. Paine — to have his
imagination somewhat heated by his writings,
and he became a member of the London Cor-
responding Society associated to improve our
constitution. There his principles were not
much improved ; he returned to Dublin, and
became a member of a reading society ; — it
WHS called the Telegraph Society ; and also
of another societv of an admirable name,
if it imported nothing mure ; that was the
Philanthropic Society, where there were read-
ings and instructions, which, if followed,
would have left the jury no constitution, no
law, upon which to hear the attoroey-gederal
state a case in the court of King*s-bench. la
that society they received instructions from
Mr. Burke, now a fugitive in America. The
^ Defenders** having broken out with unusual
violence last summer, approached the capital^
and began to disturb the outlets of the city.
Lawler, a member of the society, and a re-
publican, desirous enough (I wilinot attempt
to conceal it) of disturbance, was asked by
some of the associates, or a discourse arose
amohg them, Kennedy, Brady, Hart, and
others, touching the *' Defenders,'* —
However the subject was first introduced, it
was proposed, that Lawler should become a
^ Defender J* and for that purpose, some of
these excellent clubbists (he will inform you
who they were) proposed bringing him to the
prisoner, then quartered in Dublin. Accord-
mgly Lawler was brought by two persons of the
names of Kennedy and Brady, to the prisoner,
opposite the barrack-gate, where the prisoner
weldon was; — they sat for some time to*

f ether. Weldon was then quartered in the
arrack, but had a lodging within a door or
two of an ale-house. Kennedy aud Brady
bring Lawler to this lodging ; after they had
sat some time drinking punch, one Clayton
came in, and they proposed to swear Clayton
and Lawler. Accordingly they were sworn
by the prisoner at the bar^ and upon being
sworn, they paid their shilling a piece. A
discourse arose, ai\er the swearing, touching
the object and nature of the *' Defenders*'
pursuits, and in the course of that conversa*
tion, the prisoner did avow, that there would
shortly be a rising in the >]orth, which would
be joined by a person whose name Weldon
did not disclose — a rising to effect by force
the piu-poses of these associated ** Drfenderi*
— ^and the other persons Kennedy and Bradv
did unite in declarations of that sort. It will
appear to you, gentlemen, that being thus
united *' DrfenderSf* Lawler was brought to
three different meetings, where <* Defenders^*
were assembled, particularly at a pubfic-iiouse
in Plunket- street — there were eighteen or
nineteen together, and there a discourse arose,
and a proposition vms made, for buying poiv-
dcr and procuring arniS| for the purfMe of

9i9]

Jamts WMonfor High Treason.

A. D. 1795.

[250

rising to seue the castle of Dublin, of seducing
the army from their duty, and by terrifying
the eood industrious citizens of this town into
A belief that the army had betrayed them,
thev might be put into the possession and
under the goTenunent of miscreants such as
these.

Suchy gentlemen, are the fects, or pretty
nearly (for I do not pretend to sa^ they are
precisely) such as will appear in evidence. I
will now state the oath administered to
Xawler by the prisoner (to whom he had
been brought by Kennedy and Brady) ; the
oath was this, ^ I William Lawler of my
own good will and consent, do swear to be
true to his maiesty king George Srd." —
The oath which the prisoner himself had
taken, but with a little addition to it, well
worthy your attention, because it appears to
me that what was designed to cover tne ^ilt,
is^ if I understand it, Uie strongest manifes-
tation of it **! will be true, while I live
%nder the. tame gcroernment*' — ^The first part
is an oath of allegiance, but not that of^re-
maiming under his government ; implicative,
demonstrabl^r, of a design to chanee the go-
vernment: — it is not limited to the life of tne
king, but while the government remains;
and when the oath was administered, the pri-
soner explained it, knowing that the object
was, to appear to be taking an oath of alle-
giance, while he was intending to destroy the
laiig — ^This, said he, is put in to deceive the
army, that they may not discover the conse-
quences. ** I swear to be true, aiding and
assisting to every free brother''— -that is a name
for a ** Dtfendet'^ known among themselves
— ** And in every form of article from the
£rst foundation 1790, and every amendment
bitherto, and will be obedient to my com-
mittees, superior commanders, and officers, in
all lawful proceedings and not otherwise*'—.
Here there is the same sort of concealment,
that is introduced in the part concerning the
king, and, gentlemen, you must perceive, that
^ lawful proceedings" mean proceedings ac-
cordmg to their laws — ** nor will I consent to
any socielr, or any brother of an unlawful
character, but will observe and obey the laws
and regulatkms of my committee to whom I
f)elong determined brother"— [Here Mr. At*
tomey-general stated the remainder of the
oalh as set out in the indictment]. This,
jgentlemen, was the oath administerra, as the
'Witness wiU swear, bv the prisoner, to Lawler
and Clajrton— an oath that needs little com-
ment; It is impossible to read it, without
putting the construction upon it, that it re-
'quires obedience to other laws than those of
the countnr. But if there were an^r doubt
upon this, ft will be removed by perusing the
catechism, which was administered and at-
tested at the same time. It is pretty much
'the same as has appeared in several coimties
of the kingdom. It is plain, that there was
init one National Convention in the world at
^e time; that of France; aod if you are satis-

fied of these overt acts, both species pf treason
will be proved, compassing tne king's death
and adhering to his enemies. [Here Mr.
Attorney stated the catechism, as in the in-
dictment]—Whether gs mean kings, you

win determine. A stroke is made first in the
paper and immediately ai\er and close to it,
are the letters es, being the final letters of the
word kings. You are to determine how they
meant to fill it up, whether with that woi^d or
not. Upon putting all the parts together,
you will determine, what the object aud ten*
dency of the force intended to be raised was ;
whether it be not manifest, that there was an
object by force to change the government,
and by that to aid the powers of France,
which is adhering to the king's enemies.
'* To emial all nations'' was to pot down the
establistied government, and to place them-
selves as gjovemors, and to exercise tliat
tyranny, which is exercised in a neiehbourine
country, and usiug as a pretence the sacrea
name of freedom.

Gentlemen, I have told you, that afUr this
oath was administered, the witness attended
two or three meetings of the ** Defendert,''
hitherto, possibly, conceiving that the ** P«-
fendert*' might be used for the purpose of ob-
taining what was their grand object, a reform
of the realm— a reform of the state, by making
it a republic, and putting men, such as him-
self in the government. But af\er attending
one or two meetings, he found the persons
assembled had objects very different from
what he had conceived. He was cautioned
to take care how he should say, he was a
Protestant, and some of those miscreants de-
partins from that religion of which they pre-
tended to be members, tbrmed designs of
massacreing their Protestant brethren. Gen-
tlemen^ let me repeat it again, for I cannot
repeat It too often, that .we do not suppose,
that any educated, or well- minded Catnolie
could entertain such a design— but young
men, whose minds are easily heated, for such
there are, unlettered men, profligate men,
without religion, or morals, of the lower
order of the people— these are the persons
who are persuaded to entertain designs of
this sort, and to the extent. of their power
would make the attempt. Lawler discovered
this-— a Protestant— seeuig the tendency oT
their meeting, and knowing that the '* De-
Jenden^ were associated throughout the
kingdom, he became alarmed for the conse-

Siiences, as to himself. He immediately dis-
osed the designs to a gentleman by whom
he had been employed—a man of great worth
and credit Lawler told him confidentially
what had come to his knowledge. That gen-
tleman, Mr. Cowan, did, as was his duty,
inform government of the situation in which
the state was, for several hundreds were
united in the scheme. Government thus
alarmed, did immediately seize upon those
against whom they had charges, and the;^ were
committed to prison :-^they now remain for

asi]

36 GBORGE III.

Trialt of the Dtfemkrt'—

[258

their ifials, and the priBoner Wcldon is first
brought up.

One piece of evidoDcei gentlemen, I have
omiUed to sUte, whkb if it should appear in
the iijght I state it, is of the tiUaost importance
to this cade* Weldoa was a private in the
7th dragoons^ which was ordiered to Cork^
there to embark for foreign service. Thus
taken from his gainful situation of a committee-
mao^ or defender-maker, it was necessary to
appoint some person to succeed him. He
{»ve the oath and the article to Kennedy,
iliat Ae might become a Committee-roaa,
Kennedy was seized, and in the fob of his
iNrcecbee were found the oath and the cate^
chism, which Weldon administered to
tiawler* So that here is a fact, which could
not be made for the occasion — a fact disclosed
before Kennedy was seised-^-that the oath
was> delivered over to Kennedy, which is fully
and clearly corroborative of the testimony of
Lawler. We will now call him, and we doubt
not you will examine this case, so important
to society, with all due deliberation, and find
such verdict^ as will do you honour, and the
public, justice.

WHliam Lawler sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.
Solicitor General,

What Itas been your occupation— were you
bred to any trade ?-4 was bred in the gilding
line.

Did vou work at that trade in England or
Ireland ?**-In both places.

Fiirst in Ireland, then in England f-^Yes
Sir*

Yo« served an apprenticeship ship here f —
Yes.

'to whom r — The first part to Mr. Robinson
of Cellege>green ; the second part to Mr. Wil-
liamson of GraAon-streeU

Did you work at your trade in England P
—Yes.

When did you return ?*->About two years
mgo.

When did you go to England ?— About the
year 1?91.

During the time you were in England, did
you belong to any political society ?— The
London Corresponding society.

Upon your return to IreUnd did you
bring any letters of intnodoctun ?— One.

To whom? — > To Archibald Hamilton
Rowan.*

From whom ?— From Danid Isaac Eatonf,
«f Bisfaopgate street, London, printer.

I suppase you delivered that letter? — ^I
delivered it to a servant of Hamilton Rowan,
i called in about a week and aaw him.

Where was lie then? — He came out of a
iMck parlour, and ste both went into the from
farioor.

i>id yon ever see him mflerwards?**-Yes I

M«*M<i

1^*4-

* See his Uial, mUi Vol. ««, p. 1038.
t Bee his trials anii^ Vol. fle, fp. 753, 785,
V«l. SA, p. un»f and ▲, n. ldi;{. potL

saw him in the street, and then in Newgate.

After your arrival in Ireland, did you
become a member of any society? — I did^
Sir.

Of what society ? — ^I do not rightly recollect
the name of the first, but after it was dis*
solved

Where did it meet ? — At my rooms at one
Galland^s in Crane lane and in Hoey*s-court«
When that was dissolved, I become a membev
of another.

What was the name of the second society ?
— The Philanthropic society ?

You do not recollect that the first had any
particular name ?— It had a name, but I do not
recollect it.

Do you recollect the name of any particu-
lar eentle man of tliat Philanthropic society?
— ^Tnere was a Telegraphic society.

But do vou remember the names of any
persons belonging to the Philanthropic so«
ciety ? — ^There was Burke and GaUand in it.

What Burke ?— Of the college. ♦

What is become of him? — I do no|
know, but am informed he is gone to Ame*
rica.

You aAerwards became a member of the
Telegraph society ?— They were both much
about the same time.

Was there any particular object of this so<«
ciety.

Iftfiieii.— Of the Telegraph ?

Mr. Curraa.— -I trust the gentlemen con-
cerned for the crown will endeavour to^ keej^
the witness, whose evidence they are apprized
of, to the strict rule of not drawing from hini
any answer, of the legahty of which there
may be a doubt. It is too general to ask what
the object of a society was. I do not state this
formally to argue upon it ; but suggest it t9
their candour.

Mr. SolicUor Genera/.— If I knew of any
other mode less leading than that which I havp
used, I would adopt it; but upon some
points it is impossible to put a question
without in some measure suggesting an an*
ewer to it.

Mr. CurrufL — ^If I am pushed to the neces-
sity of arguing the ground of the objection, it
will require very little to be said in s\^]^rt
of it. This man says he was a member of a
particular society, and he is asked what was
the object of that society, although the prir
soner was not a member of it.

Mr. Justice Ckamberkin^^You have not
laid a Ibundation for asking this question, uor
less you establish a privity between this so-
ciety and the prisoner.

Mr. SoUeitor Gener«/.-rIf I were driven tp
argue this question, I could support it by very
recent abjudications. To show the genersd
acbemes of treason^ it is competent to exa-
mine as to the olyect and design of the peiv
eonschar^astiaiters; it was the unitonii
practice in the cases of Hardy and Tooke.*

« Awte Vol Si,4>? 19^a.«n4 Volf 8d P, It /

S53]

Jama Wddcmfor High Tr<ium.

A. D. 179£.

[SS4

But it is not kind to embarrass. the Court, if it
can be avoided,

Was there any other society, besides the
Philanthropic and Teleeraph of which you
l>ecaiDe a member? — ^Not till I became a
inen»ber of the Defenders.

Did they call themselves Defenders?— They
net in several parts of the town.

You say you were of a society called De-
fenders?— I believe about a fortnight af\er
the Fermanagh militia left Dublin, Brady and
Kennedy ealied upon me to go to Weldon to
be sworn as a Defender.

Conrt, — You cannot ascertain the time more
particularly ? — No, my lord.

Court* — ^Neither the month, nor the day?—
No my lord, for Brady was to have brought
me to Hanlon, but he leaving town, Brady
brought me to Weldon.

Mr. Solicitor General. — Who was Kennedy?
<«— He was an apprentice to Mr. Kennedy, the
glass-cutter in Stephen-street.

What was Kennedy's Christian name? — I
do not know. ^

Mr. Curran. — It strikes me, that this is not
a fair examination, to examine the witness to
the aets of two strangers unconnected with
the prisoner. It is evidence to say, that two
persons carried him, the witness, to the pri-
soner— ^but to sa;^ they called upon him with the
intention of having him sworn is matter of opr-
nion, and the evidence ought to consist of facts.

Covft. — Unless the witness was sworn, the
evidence will signify nothine.

Mr. SolkUor General. — You saw Weldon
tfie prisoner? — ^Yes.

Where was it ?— At the stables belonging
to the horse-barrack.

Court. — Were Brady and Kennedy along
with you? — Yes iny lord.

Mr. SoUcUor General. — When you met
Weldon, where was he ? — ^He happened to be
in the stable ?— On Brady's asking for him he
came out; Brady introduced me to him; we
then went to a public house.

Before you got to the public house, did
Weldon say or do anything?— No to me.
He only asked me how I was, and shook hands
with me.

Did nothing particular pass in the manner
•f introducing you? — No, sir; not there.

When you arrived at the public house,
what happened there? — ^When we went to
the public house, a naggin of whiskey was
called for; we went into a back parlour.
Brady told Weldon he should go for Flood,
who promised to meet them.

Court. — ^Do YOU mean that Brady would go
for Flood? — Yes, that he, Brady, would go
for Fk)od.

Court. — ^Did he mention his christian
name ? — No, my lord, he did not

Mr. SeHtkor- General. — Did Flood come ? —
Weldon desired Brady not to be Jong. After
some time a little boy came.in, and told Wel-
don his Slipper was.ready. *Weldon said that
was his little boy, his son.*

What happened next ?-* Weldon went to
get his supper.

Did Weldon return after ? — ^Brady returned
first, and Clayton along with him.

A Juror. — ^You were left alone then ?— £x«*
cent Kennedy.

Mr. Solicitor General. — ^Did Weldon retom
after any interval ?— He did sir.

How long after? — In about a quarter of an
hour.

When he returned, what happened? — After
he sat down, and took a glass of puneh, he
said, « We had better make these two.'*

Whom did he mean ? — ^Me, and Clayton : —
Bradv asked him if he had a prayer book ?
Weldon said he hadi

Did he take out a prayer book ? — He did and
lud it upon the table.

What happened after the book was produc*
ed ?— ^He pulled out some papers and desired
Claytpn and me to take hold of the prayer
book in our right hands.

Do you recolicfct any oonversation particu-
larly r(4ative to the object of swearing? — ^Not
before he put the oath.

Were you told the purpose for which tb^
oath was given? — Yes.

Were you informed of it before ? — Yes.

You were brought to Weldon to be sworn?
—I was.

He administered the oath?— He did.

How did it begin ?— It began «* I, A. B.'»

You have had an opportunity of seeing thft
paper ?— Yes.

What was it ):— He said it was a test.

Should you know the paper agun ?-— Ye^
sir.

[Here a naper was produced, begianins l^A.R.
&c. wnich the witness said was tne s^^ne
paper he bad seen with WeldonJ

Mr« Solicitor General. — You were sworn t»
the contents of that paper?

Mr. Curran. — I object to this as a lead-
ing question, Were you sworn to the contents
of that paper? What is the answer, but I wa9.
or I was not.

Mr. Solicitor General. — ^You say you were
sworn to that paper ? — I was to two.

Is this one one of them ? — It is.

Show him the otl^er : Is that the other ?
—Yes, Sir.

[The paper beginning l^A. B. was then read.
See it in the mdictment]

Mr. WNally. I object to this paper going
in evidence to the jury, on account of a va-
riance between it and the indictment the oath
in the indictment i^' I William Lawler." This
paper is I, A. B.

Mr. Solicitor General. How were you sworn
to that paper? — Did you pronounce your name
—Yes : I William Lawlcr.

[The second paper called the catechism, was
then read. See it in the indictment.]

Mr. Solicitor General. — After you were

£55] 36 GEORGE Ul.

Bwom wliat happened next? — After t was
sworn to these papers ?

Yes ; what happened ? — Brady asked him if
iie knew of any man to head them when they
.were to rise. Weldon sud, there was one
in the North, hut did not mention his name.

Had you any &rther conversation? Be-
memher such as you can ? — He told us after^
that before the time there would be letters
sent through the country to tell them when
ihey were to rise.

What farther happened ? — He was asked in
what manner every one would become ac*
quainted with it— or how would they get to
know it ?

By whom was he asked? — ^I believe by
Kennedy.

You are sure the question was asked ? — ^Yes
theauestion wasasiced.

What answer did Weldon make? — He
said the committee-men would acqufunt
them.

What farther hanpened upon that occa-
sion ? — ^Nothini^ I believe, of any consequence.

At that meeting ? — No, sir.

You got no instructions of any kind ? —
Weldon was to tell Brady of any meeting of
Defenders.

' Court. ^md Weldon tell Brady so ?— Yes,
my lord ; he said he believed there would
he a nieetinz in the next week in Thomas-
street of Defenders, but did not mention the
particular place.

Mr. Solicitor General, — ^You have sworn
to two papers, which have been read ; had
you anv opportunitv of seeing these papers at
any other time and with whom ?— 1 saw them
with Kennedy afterwards.

Did you ever hear Weldon say any thing
of them } — ^Weldon told me he would give
these papers to Brady before he left town. .

Court. — ^Did he say he was leaving town?
•^Yes, my lord, to go to Cork.

Mr. Solicitor Genera/.— Had you any inti-
mation from any body then present of any
meeting to be had? — Brady of a Sunday
brought me to a meeting.

Cmrt, — ^Did Weldon say for what purpose
he would leave the papers? — He did not.
He told us the signs so as to know a De-
fender.

Mr. Solicitor General, — ^Tell the juiy and
the Court what the 9igns were? — Weldon
said, suppose you happen to be in company
and want to know a Defender, the sign is to
put the two hands joined backwards upon the
top of the head, and preteAd to yawn, then
draw the hands down upon your knee or upon
the table. Then the otner answers, by draw-
ing the right hand over the foreh^ and re-
turning it upon the b&ck of the left hand. The
person in answer or reply to that dniws the
left hand across the forehead, and returns it
to. the back of the righ t hand. Upon shaking
hands, they pressed the thumb of the right
hand upon the back of the left, and not to
be aft aid to hurt the person, and if they asked
what was the pass word " Eliphimatii,*'

THals qfth^ Defindirs*^ ^

[25tf

Did he tell you any thing clSe ? — ^Nd, he
did not.

I observe in that oath, there is a sentence
to be true to George the third, was there any
conversation about that? — At the time he
finished it and we kissed the book, he asked
if we liked it? We said we did. He turned
about, and looked to Brady, who said, ^ they
knew what they came here for. I told them
before they came."

Did any body at that time talk about tho
words " George the third'' in the oath?

Court, — ^That is a leading question.

Mr. Solicitor General. — Was there any con^
versation about the oath?

Mr. Curran. — ^Thatis not a way in which*
to put a question in a case of life.

Mr. Solicitor General. — I will argue it if
the Court have any doubt^ and assign my
reasons.

Mr. Cumin. -^ I say a leading question
is not to be pu^ and a questk)n to which the
answer is yes, or no is a leadiug question.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain. — A leading quc»*
tion is that which suggests the answer. Now
if he answer yes to this question, and stop
there, Utat will not do — iiiis question then
does n^ suggest the answer.

Mr. SbfiaUn- Genera/.— What did he say?
— He saiq, laughing, that if the king's heftd
were off to-morrow morning we were no
longer under his ^vernment.

Wasth^t explaining the oath?— The test
that he put first. I asked him, was he no%
afraid of keeping these papers about him in
consequence of being^in the horse. He said«
no ; tor they were . never searched ; but he
did not care who saw the first paper, for the
small paper was the principal. The first
paper, he said, was only a cloak for the army.
• Did he say, why? — ^On account of swearing
them to be true to the king. He said, he
had sworn several of them, and that they
would have some objection to part of it, but
for that clause.

Court. — Was it to reconcile them ? — Yes.

Mr. Solicitor Genera/.— ^Weldon said he
would hand over the papers to Brady ? — Yes.

Did you ever see them afterwards ? — With
Kennedy.

When? — ^About a fortnight after Weldon
went out of town.

How came they into Kennedy's hands ? — I
do not know.

Did you know them ? — I challenge(1 them
at a place in Drury-lane ; Murphy lived in
Church-street; he and I were together, and
I said

Mr. M'Nalfy objected to this . evidence,
and the witness was stopped by the Court.

Mr. Soliiitor General. — Did Brady ever
give you anv intimation of any other meet-
ing?— He brought roe to one in Plunket-
street.
. To a meeting of what ? — Of Defenders.

Were any ofthe same persons present that
were with Weldon ?

297)

Jama Wddonjbr High Treason.

A. D. 179S.

[SSS

OiNirl.— When wm this? — I cannot re-
collect

Mr. SeUcUcr General, — ^Who was at that
meeting? — Kennedy was along widi me at
the same time.

There were a good many there ?**-There was
a eood many there.

was there any thing done at that as-
sembly f

Mr. Cicrraik— Do the cowisel think that
evidence ^

Mr. SoUeiiar General, — I do.

- Mr. Curran, — ^What ! afifecta man*s Hfe by
what was done at meetings^ when be was an
hundred miles off !

Mr. SokcUor General, — ^I think it evidence,
though the counsel asks the question with
SDOie aatonishroent It is a rule of law,
settled in a Taricty of cases, and recognized
m the very last, that it being once esta-
WfAied that the jprisoner belonged to a so-
cle^

• Mr. Justice Ckamherlain,'^yfe areof opinbn
that this is evidence, that there is a foumlation
laid for it, by swearing that Weldon said, there
were to be subsequent meetings, and that they
shouldhavenotice of them from Brady ; that is
aibondbtion to let in evidence of what is done
at those meetings.

Mr. SolieUor Genera/.'^ What happened
at that subsequent meeting? — They were
patUae- down money oa the table, and I
was awed for six-pence, as a collection for
powder-*-

- Court. — ^Whe asked you? — Brady desired
me to put down six-pence. I told Brady
I had not siz-pence. Kennedy said he
would lend me one ; he gave me a shilling ;
I laid down- the shilling and took up sixpence
and gave it to Kennedy. I was told, tnat a
man of the name of Lockington then in the
loom was a Captain of Defenders.

Mr. SolkUor Genera/.— What else hap*
yened f What powder did you mean ?— Gun-
powder. I unoersiood from them, that they
wanted powder, as th^ were going out to get
anns^ but not that nis bt.

Did you understand horn the company for
what they wanted the arms ^ — They did
not say.

Mr. Baron George.— His conclusion, or his
opinion is not evidence ; but ask him as to
facts done, or the conversations held.

Mr» Solicitor Genera/.— Did any thing
more pass? — 1 understood there was to be a
meeting. Brady and Kennedy both told me
there was to bo a meeting after that.

Where did they tell you that ?— At the
meeting.

Did you ^e any of that company ar any
other place and where ?*^I did.

Where?—- At Stoneybatter the corner of
Avbour-hill.
' Who- gave you notice ? — 1 do not know.

You saw the same company?— 8ome of
them. Hart, Leaiy, Cooke and others.

Mr. Baron Gi9r^e«— Unless he got notice

VOL XXVI,

from Brad^, who was the person authorbed,
it is not evidence.

Mr. Solicitor General. — Did yen see
Brady or Kennedy afterwards? — I did.

Where? — ^At their own place in Stephen-
street.

Wierc' Brady and Kennedy at Stoney-
batter?— No, sir.

Of what people was the subsequent meet-
ine ?— irjf Defenders.

Mr. Curran. — The Court desired you not
to give evidence of that.
- Mr. Solicitor General, — I hope the Court
have laid down no rule upon the subject.

Mr. Baron George. — We think you have
not laid any foundation for the meeting at
Stoneybatter.

Mr. Solicitor General, — My lords, I submit
this is evidence. Upon all occasions where
the proceedings of any society are let in, all
their acts are thereby made evidence. And
so it was HI the State Trials lately, respectinj^
the London Corresponding Society, and their
conduct was evidence of overt acts. I have
established the fact, that there was a meeting
of a body of men called Defenders : this man
was admitted into them, and the evidence
goes to show, that subsequent meetings under
the same appellation and obligation did as-
semble, ana did do certain acts which will
illustrate the charge against the prisoner^

Mr. Baron George, — I do not say, whether
they may not be evidence ; but I think you
have not yet laid a foundation to let in evi^
dehce of the meeting at Stoneybatter.

Mr. Solicitor General, — You saw the oafth
a^erwardsin Kennedy's hands; upon what
occasion ? — Upon a meeting with Murphy.

Where? — ^At Drury-lane m a workshop.

You said there were certain signs commu-
nicated bv Weldon by which a Defender
might be known ? — Yes.

Did you see them made use of upon any
occasion and where ? — Hart has asked me if—

Mr. Jlf jATa/Zv oljected to this conversation
as not bavins been at a meeting.

TTirnetff.— Nobody is brought to a meeting
unless introduced by a person who is a member.

Court. — ^What do you mean by that? —
There must be some person in the place who
will know him.

Mr. Solicitor GeneraiL-r-Know him to be
what ? — A Defender.

Somebody went with you to Stoneybatter?
— Yos; Wabh.

Who is he.? — A tailor.

Was he at the former meeting ?— No.

How did ]^ou know him ?— As being of the
Philanthropic Society.

Was he a Defender?— He was from the
signs he used.

What Walsh is he ?— A tailor in Fisham-
ble-street.

Did you know any other person by the
signs ? — Hart and Cooke.

Were thav of the meeting at Stoneybatter f
—Yes; inooneLeary aslwe»maker.

H

239]

36 GEORGE UI.

Triah of the Dykndert'^

[S60

CtfuW.-^Did you see them viake.UWi signs ?
— Cooke came out of a place where he held a
school in Stoneybatter, and shook me by the
hand as a Defender.

Mr. Solicitor Genera/.— Was the meeting
at Cooke's house P — Not as I know of.

Where was the meeting at Stoneybatter?
— At Murphy's, an inn where cars set up.

Court, — Was Cooke at the meeting } — ^Yes.

Mr. SolicUor GeneraL-^^Who else?— Walsh
and Hart.

Did they all make the signs ?-rNot there ;
they did at different times.

Am I to underatandy that you frequented
these Hieetings as a Defender yourself?—
I did.

How long did you continue to be a De-
fender ?— I dEindot rightly tell.

CauBot you sa^ bow bug?— I beUere aboot
tlkree monthft,

Court, — What were the skns made «ae«f
at Stoaeyba^ter?— Shaking the hands.

Mr. Solicikfr Genera/.— Any thing else ?-«^
No.

How did yon shake the handsP— ^y press-
ing the thumb upon the hand.

In the manner WeMon had told P— Yes.

Mr. Justice C/umier/nan.— Now we think
there is a foundation laid to let in the pro-
ceedings there.

Mr., ^'/ict'f or Genera/.— What were the pro*
ceedines ? — Hart brought in a young man and
swore him. I saw lum lay a small paper upon
a book.

• What kind of sweanng was it that was made
usff of. — I do not know. He told him he was
brought to be sworn to be a Defender ; he was
not inclined to be sworn at first : Hart said he
was to become a Defender, as the object was
to get arms to assist the French when they
would come.

Was that man sworn ? — Yes.

In ti)e same way that you were P— He told
liim the signs.

Did you see them shown to him ?— I did.

Court.— Did you see him sworn ?— I did.

Coicr^--lB the same manner as before P<i—
I oannot say. There was a small paper kid
upon a book : I was near the door and could
not get near bim^ there being many in the
room and it a small one.

Mr. SolicUor Genera/.— ^You say you con-
tinued a Defender three months?— I did, I
believe.

What induced you to cease being a De-
fender ? Did you tell any body you were a
Defender P— I did.

To whom^-To Mr, Cowan in GraAon-
street, after there was a meeting in Drury-
kne at one Nowkm's.

Who were at that meeting?— Hart, CookcL
Dry, Turner^ Lockiaglon, Keaaedy, and
Flood, and Coffey. ^^ ^^

What WIS done there P-*M.We aiei for the
purpose of getting arms.

It WM soon after timt meeting yon %M Mr.
Cowan?— Ob the Moodier.

Why did you tell himP-^Onacoomit of what
I heard Hart declare.

What was that d^aration ^-4Ie tapped
me on the shoulder, and I followed him to a:
window. He asked me, if Dry and Cofiey;
were not Protestants. I said I beliered they
were. He said he would not-sit in company
with them.

Was this said aloud ? — No it was not.

Then I hate no right to ask it. Did vou
hear any thing said aloud ? — ^They said Uiey>
would meet on the Sunday folfewine, but I
could not hear rightly what passed n'om at-
tending to Hart. We were called to order
twice for being from the company.

Did you hear any thing pass P-4^fiey was
in the chair, and wanted to know, how many
Defenders there were in Dublin, that there
might be officers put over them> that they
might be all ready.

lou mentionea before, that there was a.
conversation about subscribing for powder ;<
was there any conversation upon a subse-
quent meeting upon that subject?— Not about
takingarms.

At Drurv-lane ?— No.

Where then? — At Stoneybatter.

What did you hear there ?— I heard Hart
desire some of them to go home for pifltsla
and arms^ that they might go out to take amis
that night.

To whom did he say that ?*^To the cottH
panv, at the house where the young lad was
made a Defender ; and afler sitting some time
and the others not returning he thought they
would not come back ; he then 4esii«l every
one remaining to lay their hands upon tfie
table, and swear on thehr oaths to appaar
there on the Monday following with pistob
to go get arms.

What oath did he mean P— The Defender's
oath, that they had taken. Hart was a ooaa*
mittee-man it was said, and any person
obliged to attend him when reauired.

You saw Hart eKoreisc the office af a torn"
mittee man by swearing another ? — T-dld.

Cottr^^Did Hart himself si^ he was a.
committeeman ?»^No, he did fioC.

Mr. Soiicitor Genera/.— You heard nootlMr'
conversation at that meeting ? — In about ftiatf.
an hour after, I said I would go home— Wahh
came out and said"

[Counsel for the prisoner oll^ected to this
evidence as private conversation.]

Mr. Solicitor Oei^oml'^Why did yon
to be one of the liody ?— in consequence or
what Hart declared.

[This was also olyecled to.]

You say there was to be a visioc andsou^**
bodv wouki liead there in the ^oith wfaoHi
Weldon did not same ? — So he said.

Did Sradyaavab^ ik^ about ibfr'SSKiie
std>jeet P— *No, he dbd not

Wasthensotivaioftbairisiiigfiajeillioaed at:
the lime ?--it was, lie saM^Aert mmli he
'letters sent,

9S1]

Jamu WMtmfor High Treason.

A. D. 1795.

[262

But what was the motite ? -~He did not say
whttitunta.

'William Lamkr cross-examined by Mr.

Cur ran.

What religion are you of ?-^A Protestant

Have you always been a Protestant ? — Yes.

Have you always professed that religion ?

•— Exoept when I was asked what religion I

^ras among th a Defenders, I said I was a Ro-

«nan| in consequence of what Brady said to

You are noty nr^apon a ^^ross-Maminatioa
voder colour of an answer to give illegal evU
dekice. I ask you, except in the case you
■emtion now. have you always professed the
Proteatant Telidao P— Yes, sir.

Do Tou think you know the principles and
mondaof what4hat religioA areP — I was
DTou^t up to be a PMtestwt, and do not like
to cbnge.

Were you taught to bcliAe that there was
aOodP«-Ye8,8ir.

Were you taught that there was the sufFer-
inf of his Son for the redemption of mankind?
•"•Yes, sir.

Do you understand that your belief of these
•aeeed doctrines is the foundation of the oath
ymi have taken N— When I had taken the
oath?

I ask vou is it the ftundation of the obli-
gation ot your oath ?— Yes, sir.

Vham you never,upoDany occasion, declared,
^at vou did not believe there was a God ?

C'ne witness hesitated some time.]
x.AUornejf GeneraL^^l do notknowwhat
theconseqoence of the question may be> but
itexpoees the man to punishment.

Mr* tf Nai2y.—-I am prepared to show that
thia question is le^

Mr. Carr0a.-^mce the question is objected
to. I will not press it. I will not ask you
arnether you nave deliberately denied the ex-
MtBOceofa God. — Since this protection is put
about you, I am sure it is necessary for you.

Hr. Jrtomey Qeneral^'l did feel that it
was a question which ousht not to be |iut; —
I have no reason to concuide what his answer
vottld be.

Mr. Carrm.— Afler this kind of arjgument
I foeLa. sort of indecorum in pressing it.

Mr. Prime 5ci7ea»i.— If this sort of use be
nade of the question the Court will determine
upon it.

Mr. Justice Ckamberlainj^li he be exposed
lo teBupofal punishment, he is not bound to
nnswer.

Mr. Carroa.— It would be adifferent thing ;
and a man night say, it is my misfortune to
be converted by arsumento of atheisto. He
mif^t have read flume upon miracles^ and
adc^kled bis notions. But I do not press it.
lYou have said that Kennedy and Brady
hnMight ym to the prisoner'e at the bar?—
Sfea. :

. Had you known Um before?— Never.
• Ygttaaj^a»yoiidtfC0vared4hqirpurpows>

you discontinued?— After what I heard from
Hart,I went to Mr. Cowan and toid him.

After tiie conversation with liart, you told
Mr. Cowan ?— Yes.

Was not that a conversation in which lie
comnuxnicated the had purpo&es of the meet*
ines ? — ^I did not like the idea of maesacreing
all the Protestants.

Was it by Hart, that idea was communicated
to you? — It WP.S.

And as soon as that was communicated to
you, you formed the desien of quitting them ?
— Oftelling what I heard.

When vras the first time you knew of their
bad designs P — ^I knew if they were to rise,
that some persons were to be destroyed ; but
I did not think they would destroy all the
Protestants.

When did you first understand that any de-
sign of this kind existed P— From the meet-
incs I used to so to. f

How long arar Weldon had gone to Cork ?
—That I told ?

That yon knew of any persons being to be
destroyed?— I knew at that meeting when
Weidon was present.

How long after Weklon's going to Cork was
it, that you had this conversation with Hart ?
— ^I do not recollect.

Compute?--! may think wrong.

Think of it ?^I know the day of the month
Hart told me, but I do not know the day of
the month Weldon went out of town.

It was some time after, however ?— It was.

Weldon said there was to be some meeting?
— ^He said he believed there would be a meet-
ing in Thomas-street,' and when there was,
he would acquaint Brady, and Brady would
acquaint us.

Do you know how soon after that Weldon
went to Cork P—rl do not.
, Do you know how long before the next
meeting he wentaway ?— I cannot tellexactly ;
it might he a week or a fortnight.

He had gone to Cork before P—I believe

so. .

Who gave you notice of it ?— I was with
Brady and Kennedy, and they brought me

there.
Did Brady say Weldon desired him to bring

you ? — ^No.

What did he say ?— He said there was a
meeting of Defenders in Plunket- street, and
asked me to go there.

He did not say Weklon desired him to bring
you ? — ^No.

You said there was no mention at the meet-
ing in Plunket-street of the French ; that was
not until the meeting at Stoneybattcr?^t
was at the meeting at Stoncybatter.

Do you recollect the distance of time be-
tween the meeting in Flunkct street and at
Stoncybatter P—I cannot tell.

I do not mean the day of the month; uor
what month it was ? — I cannot tell the time.

Did you make any speeches at Piunkct-
ati«et?-*'Mo,tir.

S6S]

36 GEORGE f II.

Trials of the Defenders^

C2S«

Was there any secretary there taking down
notes P— Not as I saw.

Brady, Kennedy, Walsh, aind Flood. The al-

. derman desired me to send for my officers ; X

Was there any chairman putting<{uestions ? did so, and dispatched them to different parts.
^-There was a man at the opposite side «f I went myself with two of them to Kennedy's

opposite
the table, near the gnile, and he put down
money upon the table, which he had col-
lected ; he said it was a subscription for pow-
der«

The next meeting was where ? — At Stooey-
batler.

Do you remember whom you saw there ? —
Hart, Leary, Cooke, and Walsh.

These were all you recollect P—Weldon
was not theie ?— No, sir.

Then there was no person at Stoneybatter,
who was present at the communication with
Weldon ?— No.

Stoneybatter was ibe first place you heard
any mention of the French?-*It was.

Recollect vourself, because it is very ma-
terial; did Weldon tell ypu that any part was
to betaken by Cooke f— He never mentioned
his name.

Nor by Hart?— No.

Nor by Walsh f — No.

That you are clear of ?— Yes, sir.

Who was it that started any mention about
the French?— -Hart.

Did he address* himself in the way of a
speech to the chair? — ^There was no person
appointed in the place. But the young man
was brought in to be sworn, he appeared shy
at first, and Hart told him the motives of be-
coming a Defender.

It was addressed to the young roan ?— It
was, but we were all present by.

Did any one else jom in it ?— -No.

He said we might get arms, and assist the
French; and no other person said anything
upon the subject ?— No, sir.

Then your evidence comes to this-— That
the only mention made about the French was
at Stoneybatter; that Hart said it to the
young man, and no one made any kind of
reply. Who did you understand from Brady
had ttild him of the meeting in Plunket-
street?— .1 was walking with him, and he told
me there was a meeUng there, and asked to
go there.

Did he say who told him of it ?— No, sir.

I. suppose you are perfectly impressed with
Uie enormous nature of the crime of making
aa attempt upon the person of his majesty?
—At that time he said we all lived

I did not ask you as to that. But did you
not conceive it to be a crime to make an at-
tempt upon the life of the king?— Not at
thattime. **

Mr. Cttrran.— I am soriy there was such a
a time; go down young man.

A Juror, — Do you now think it an enor-
mous crime?— I certainly do.

Cliver Carkton, Esq. Sworn. Examined by

Mr. Sauran,

What is that paper in your hands?— I had
got a warrant from alderman Ji|meS| against

the glass man in Stephen-street,, at half past
five m the morning— p—

You were at that tune in a public office ?-^
Yes. We knocked at the door some time.
Two boys came down at a bads door in Dru»
ry-lane. I asked them their names; tliey
said Kennedy and Brady; I took them itotp
custody. I had been desired to examine thci
fob of Kenned v's])reeches, and I should fijad
there the oath and the. catechism. I did
search the fob, and found them both. .

Were these the papers [showing them
to the witness ?1 — ^Xhese are the papers. .

What was tnen done with Kennedy ?r— I
took him and Brady into custody and brought
them to the Castle guard. .

What became of Kennedy? — I saw him ia
Newgate some tiiAe ago.

Oliver Carleton, Esq. cross-examined by

Mr. M'Naliy,

How long have vou known Lawler? — ^I do
not know him at all.

Have you ever heard any thing of him ?— •
I never asked. an^ person about him; nor
ever heard any t^mg about him. «

. You know nothing of Wieldon? — ^No.

Court, — Who informed.you, that you would
find these papers upon Kenpedy ?•— Alderman
Jam^s, who desired me to be particular in
searching Kennedy, for .1 would find them in
his breeches pocket.

. A Juror, — Kennedy is a boy ?— He ia aveiy
young man— So is Brady.

Juror, — ^What age may he be ? — ^I am a veiy
bad judge of the age of a person.

Defence. ' .

Mr. Curran, — My Lonls, and Grcntlemen
of the Jury ; I am of counsel in one of those
cases in which the humanity of our law is^
verv fortunately, joined with the authonty
and wisdom of the Court in alliance wicb roe
for the purposes of legal protection. Gentle^
men, I cannot however but regre^ .that that
sort of laudable, and amiable anxiety for the
public .tranquillity, which glows warmest in
the breasts of the best men, has perhaps
induced Mr. Attorney General to state some
facts to the court and the jury^ of which no
evidence was attempted to be given. And I
make the observation only for this purpose
to remind you, gentlemen, that the statement
of counsel is not evidence — to remind you,
that you are to give a verdict, upon this sd^
lemn and momentous occasion, founded aim-
ply upon the evidence which has been given
to you ; for such is the oath.you have taken;
I make . the observation; 'Uot onljr in order to
call upon you to discharge any impresaioniL
not supported by testimony, but to remiod.
you also of another incontrovertible maxim^
not only of the humane law of RffglamV but

£66]

Jamti Wddonfor High Triason.

A. D. 1795.

[806

•r eternal nistice upon which that law is
Abunded — that the more horrid and atrocious
the. nature of any crime charj^ed upon any
man is, the more clear and invincible should
be the evidence upon which he is convicted.
The charge here is a charge of the most enor-
mous criminality, that the law of any country
can know — ^no. less than the atrocious and dia^
bolical purpose of offering mortal and fatal
violence to the person of the sovereign, who
ought to be sacred. The prisoner is chaised
with entertaining the suiity purpose of des-
•troving all order ana all society, for the
well bemg of which the person of the king is
held sacred. Therefore, gentlemen, I presume
to tell you, that in proportion as the crime is
fttiocioua and horrible, in the same proportion
should the evidence U> convict, be clear and
irresistible. Let me therefore endeavour to
discharge the duty I owe to the unfortunate
man at the bar (for unfortunate I consider
him whether he be convicted or acMduitted;, by
drawing your attention to a consiaeration of
the facts charged, and comparing it with the
evidence adduced to support them.

The charge gentlemen is of two kinds — ^two
species of treason— founded upon the statute
26 £d. 3. One is, compassug the king's
death. Ttie other is a distinct treason — that
of adhering to the king's enemies. In both
cases, the criminality most be clearly esta*
biiahed, under the words of the statute, by
hawing the guiltv man convicted of the offence
hy prooabU evidence of ouert'oets, .Even in
the case of treason and it is the only one,
wtiere by law the imagination shall complete
the crime, there that guilt must be proved and
can be proveable only by outward acts, made
use of by the criminal for the effectuation of
his guilty purpose. The overt acts stated
here are, that he associated with traitors un-
known, with the design of assisting the
French, at war with our government, and
therefore a public enemy, — Sndly, Consulting
with others for the purpose of assisting the
French. 3rdly, Consulting with other traitors
to subvert the government.— 4thly Associa-
ting with Drfenawi to subvert the protestant
reli^n. — 5tbly, Enlisting a ^lerson stated^in
the indictment to assist the French and admi-
Difiterins an oath to him for that purpose,
6thly, Enlisting him to adhere to the French.
7thly, Corrupting Lawler to become a Defen-
der.— 8thly, Enlisting him by administering

an oath for similar purposes. In order to

warrant a verdict convicting the prisoner,
there must be clear and convincing evidence
of some one of these overt acts, as thev are
laid. The law requires that there should be
stated upon record such an act as in point of
law will amount to an overt act of the treason
charged as matter of evidence, and the evi-
dence adduced must correspond with the Act
cluuiged. The uniform rule which extends to
every case appties to this, that whether the
fact char;^ be sustained by evidence, is for
tha.conicicpceand the oath of th&juryi. ac-

cording to &e dc^ee of credit they give to
the testimony ofit. Li treason the overt
act must sustain the crime, and the evidence
must go to support the overt act so stated. If
this case were tried at the other side of the
water, it does not strike roe that the very ir-
relevant evidence given by Mr. Carleton could

have supplied what the law requires the

concurring testimony of two wUncita. I can-
not be considered, indfeed I should be sony,
to put any sort of comparison between such a
person as Mr. Carleton and the first witness
who was called upon the table. Gentlemen
of the Jury, you have an important province
indeed— the life and death ot a man to decide
upon. But previous to that you must consi-
der, what degree of credit ought to be given
to a man under the circumstances of that wit-
ness produced against the prisoner. It does
appear to me, maX his evidence merits small
consideration in point of credibility. (But
even if he were as deserving of belief as the
witness who followed, and that his evidence
were as credible as the other's was immate-
rial, I shall yet rely confidently, that every
word if believed does leave the accusation un-
supported.

Gentlemen, I will not a£5:ont the idea
which ought to be entertained of you, by
warning you not to be led away by those
phantoms which have been created by preju-
dice, and applied to adorn the idle tales drunk
down by folljr, and belched up by malignity.
You are sensible that you are discharging the
peatest duty that law and religion can repose
in you, and I am satisfied you will discard
your passions, and that your verdict will be
ibunaed, not upon passion or prejudice, but
upon your oaths and upon justice. Consider
what the evidence in point of fact is. — ^LawIer
was brought by Brady and Kennedy to Weidon,
the prisoner, in Barrack-street; what Brady
said to him before, if it had been of moment
in itself, I do not conceive, can possibly be
extended to the prisoner, who did not assent
to the words ana was not present when th^
were uttered. Lawler was carried to the pri-
soner at the bar to be sworn ; — And here give
me leave to remind yeu, what was the evi-
dence— to remind you that the expressions
proved do not bear that illegal import which
real or affected loyaltv would attach to them;
and therefore you will discharge aU that cant
of enthusiasm from your minds. — I wish that
I were so circumstanced as to be entitled to an
answer, when I ask Mr. Attorney-seneral,
what is the meaning of the word Defender ?
I wish I were at liberty to appeal to the sober
imderstandingof any man for the meaning of
that tremendous word. I am not entitled'^ to
put the question to the counsel or to the court
—but I am entitled to call upon the wise and
grave consideration of the court to say, whe-
ther the zeal of public accusation has affixed
any definite meaning to the word ?— I would
be clad to know whether that expression,
which is annexed to the title of the highest

a©?]

S6 GEORGE m.

Trials of the Defimderi^

[S68

magistrate, marking hb btghesk obli^jttkm
.aodstylingbiin theVefeuder of tbereligioD of
the country, ia common parlaooe acquired
«oy uew combination, carrying with it a
-crime, when applied to any other man in the
community? — Let me warn you, therefore,
Against that sort of faliacioua lexicography
.vrbich forms new words, that undergoing the
•eiaminatlon of political slander or iatem-
,|pcrate zeal, are considered as having a known
Aocepiion.— Whatis the word ?— A word that
^should be discarded, when it is sought to 9§-
£x to it another meaning than that which it
lieam in the cases where it ia used. Let me
remind you that a Defender^ or any. other
4ermuBed to denote any confiatenuty, club,
lor society, like any other wocd, is arbitrary,
4Mit the meaning should be explicit And,
therefore, with i^eaid to this trial, you are
to reject the wordj as having no meaning;,
imless from ihe evidence you find, it has m
the mind of the party a definite explication ;
— Fnr observe that the witness, such as he is
-^such as he was, with all his zeal for the
Airlherance of justice, which he was once
ready to violate by the massacre of his fellow
subjects — with all his anxiety for his soye^
reign's safety, whom he was once ready to as-
sassinate, he,. I say, has not told you, that
either Brady or Kennedy or any other person
stated what the principles were that denoted a
Drfender,

. But I will not rest the case of my client
ttpon that ground: — no, it would be a foolish
kind of defence, because words might be
used as a cloak and therefore might be colour-
ably introduced. You, gentlemen, are then
to consider what this oath, this nonsensical
oath, wkkh so &r as it is intelligible is inno*
cent, and so far as it is nonsense, can prove
nothing, you are to consider, whether, inno-
cent and nonsensical as it may appear, it was
yet a cover and a bond for treasonable asso-
ciation—-It b not in my recollection, .that any
evidence was given, that the o^h was con-
ceived in artfully equivocal expressions, for
forming! under the sanction of loyal language,
a treasonable association. — Is one of the par-
ties laughing, evidence, that it was treason-
able, or the bond of a criminal confederation?
— It is not Is it treasonable to say, ** that
yrere the king's head off to-morrow, the alle-
giance to him would be at an end ?"— It is not.
The expressions may bring a man into dbre-
pute — may kad the mind of a jury into a sus-
picion of the morality of the man who used
tliem— but nothing more. It may be asked
why should there be any thing insidious ? —
why, but to cover a treasonable purpose, are
all these suspicious circumstances ? — It b not
ioT me, nor is it the prisoner's duty to account
for them in defendmg himself against this
charge; because circumstances are not to
mndcr innocence doubtfiil, but it b full
proof, esublishing the guilt and the treason
mdubilably, which the law requires. Theaa-
tinre^ I aubmil, .that, even if the .evidence

Gouki be belbved, it does not siiMort the
overt acts. Was there a ward of vioMling the
person of the king } — Any affected misrepre*
sentation of any abuse of government?—
Have you beard a word stated of the king not
being an amiable king^ Any words cootu-
roeliously uttered respecting hb per8on---db-
respectfttl of hb government — expressive of
any public grievance to be removed, or good
to t>e attained ? — ^Not a word of such a subject
— Nothing of the kind is proved bv thb soli-
tary witness in ail hb accuracy of detail.

Was there any propeaition of assbtiag the
French in case they invaded thb kingdom ?<—
To support tlwt ebaigfs e nonsenskal catechism
b prooueed— There it is asked, *' Where did
the cock crow when all the vrorld heard him ?**
— What kind of old women's stones are these
to make an impression upon your minds ?—
Well, but what does that mean ? Why, can
you be at a k>ss ?— <It means to->kill the king !
—•Look at the record— it charces the persona
with compassing the king's death, and the
question aoout the crowing of a cock b the
evidence against them.

Gentlemen^ you all know, for you are not
of ordinary d»cription, that the statute of
£d w. Srd was made to reduce vague and wan-
dering treasons — to abolish the doctrine of
constructive trj^aaon and to mark out some
limited boundanes, clear to e court and juijr.
If a man has been guilty of dissespect m
point of expression to the government or the
crown, the law has ascertained hb emit
and denounced the punishment But all the
dieadfiil uncertainty intended to be guarded
against by the statute, and which before the
passing oi the statute had prevailed in case of
treason, and which had shed upon Uie sca^
foM some of the best blood in England, would
again run in upon us, if a man were to sufier
an ignominious death under such circum*
stances as the present, if c<|uivocal expres*
sions should be taken as decbive proof, or if
dubious wotdn were to receive a meaning
from the seal of a witness, or the heat,, passion
or prejudice of a jury. The true rule by which
to ascertain what evidence should be deemed
sufficient against a prisoner is, that no man
should be convicted of any crime except upon
the evidence of a man sultject to an imnct-
ment for peijury, where the evidence is such
as if false, the falsehood of it may be so
proved as to convict the witness of perjoiy.
But what indictment coukl be supported tor n
laugh, a shruz, or a wink? — Wes there any
conversation about killing the king ? — Ho :-«
but here was a laugh— *tbere wafi an oath to
which we were sworn— and thea^-there was
a wink; by which I uoderstoody we were
s^rearing one thing and meant another .*— Why,
gentlemen, there can he no safetv to the ho-
nour, the property or the life of man, in a
country where such evidence as thb. shall be
deemed sufficient to convict a prisoner. There
is nothing necessary to sweep a man iirom so*
ciety^ but 1^ find ^ miKreant ef sufficient

969J

/omei Wddumjor High Treaion.

A. D. ms.

[270

eoonniiy* wad- the nnibrtaiiate accused is
drifted down the torrent of the credulity of a
-» ^ipell4nteodiiig jury^-See how material this
i8» Weldon was present aH>n]y one conversa-
tion with the witness. It is not pretended by
tiie oouosel for the crown, that ue euilt as to
any personal evidence against Weklon does
not stand upon the first conversation. Was
there a woitl upon that conversation of ad-
hmng to the king's eaemi^? It was started
in the caae» and certainly nude a strone im-
pvneioo, that Lawkr was enlisted in order to
assist the French. — ^I heard no such evidence
^en. The st^ of what he calkd Defenders
were communicated to him ; the oath which
he took was read, and he was told there would
he a subsequent meeting of which the witness
ahOMhl receive notice from Brady.

Gcatleinen, before I cpiit that meeting at
Banack- street, let me put this soberlv to you.
What is the evidence upon which uie court
can leave it to you to determine, that there
is equivocation in the oath P-<-It must be in
this way: vouareto ooasider words in the
sense in which they are spoken, and in writ*
lags words sre to be taken in their common
meaning. Words have sometimes a technical
aenipfofthe purposesof certainty— They aoay
also be made the signs of arbitrary ideas, and
therefore I admit a treasonable meanine may
be attached to words which in their ordinary
aifprification are innooent.-~*Bttt where is the
csidenee, «r what has the witness said to make
yoa believe that these «nnds in the oath were
ased in any ether than in the common ordi-*
nary aoccptatioii f Not a word as I have
beara. WeUoa can- be affected only per-
soaally either, first uaon acts bv faimselr, or
bgr other acts bronght nome to him from the
gjBDeral circumstances of tfw case.-4 am eon-
sMleriag it in that two- fold way, and I submit,
that if It stood upon the evidence, respecting
the conduct of the prisoner at Barrack-Street
alsne, there could not be a doubt as to bis
acqaiital. It is necessary, therefore, that I
shoald take some faither noticft of the sobse-
qoenl part of the evidence. The witness
stated, that Weldon informed him, that there
wioald be another meeting of whiefa, he the
witaess, should have notice. He met Brady
and Kennedy, they told him there was a
aeetiog at Plunket«treet ; and here give me
leave m Temind the court, that there is no
evideoce, that tliere was ai^ guiltv purpose in
afilation to be maliired at any tmure meift-
ing— no propossd of any criminal design.
Tbcaa ought to be evidence to show a con-
BMoon between the prisoner, and the subse-
qaent meeting as held mder his authority.
It is of gvtat moment to recdlect, that before
aa^meetm^ Weldoa had left town, and in the
nmnkm orany mteting to be hekl, let it be
reamnbersdhe did net state any particular
sal^eot, as eompi^^tvenillBg the object ^yf the
naetiBg; fW^hat faaaaened ? There oertBitfly
a 'msflliaB at fibalMt-stiait-4>«t Aiere
Mta^veii of flBftislkig ih* Frsach— atf)

subverting the reli^n—of madsacreing the
Protestants-— of any criminal design whatever.
—There was not any consultation upon any
such design. I make this distinction, and
rely upon it, that where consultations are
overt acts of this or that species of treason, it
must be a consultation by the members com-'
posing that meeting ; because it would be the
most ridiculous nonsense, that a conversa-
tion addressed from one individual to another,
not applied to the meeting, shotdd be called a
consultation — But in truth there is no evi-
dence of any thing respecting the French ex-
cept in Stoneyt>atter— There for the first time
the witness says, he beard any mention of the
French. Here, gentlemen of the jury, let
me beseech you to consider what the force of
the evidence is. Supposing that what one
man said there to anotner about assisting the
French, to have been criminal, shall WeMon,
who was then for a week, 100 miles from the'
scene, be criminally affected by what was cri-
nmially done at Stoneyhatter f It is not only
that he shall be criminally affected by what
was eriminally done, but even to the shed-
ding of his blood, shall he be affected by what
any individual said, who casually attended
that meeting! — ^Have you any feeKugof the
precimoe to which you are hurried, when
cailea upon to extend thb evidence in sudi a
manner? — ^without any one person being
present with whom the prisoner h^d any pre-
vious confederation ! You will be very can*
tious indeed, how *you establish such a pre-
cedent. How did Weldon connect himself
with anv other meeting? Why, he said^
there will be another meeting, you shall have*'
notice — ^It would be going a great way to af*'
feet him in conseooence of that. I lay dbwa
the law with oonfiaence, and I say there is na
doctrine in it, so well ascertained and esta-
blished, as that a man is to he criminally af^
fected only by bis own acts^-the man to be
charged, must be charged with ovett acts of
his own. There is no law — no security — no
reason in that country where a man can be
mowed down* h^ our fboHshly creditinc the
evidence, not of acts of his own, but of the
acts of others, constructivel)r applied to him,
who did not attend the mating, nor was ever
aware of it.

If a man were to be exposed to the penal-'
ties of treason hatched an^ perpetrated in his-
ahsence, every >member of society becomes'
liable to be out off by mere saspicioo. I
say, no man could ^o to his bed with an ex-
pectation of sleepmg in it again if he were
liable to be called upon to answer a charge of
suspicions words, spoken when he "was 100
miles off, Ijy miscreants wifti whom he had'
DO connexion. Good God 1 Gentlemen, only
take asulider the eindence upon which you
;are called upon to take away the life of this
onan.-^^ You, WoWon, are c^ajeable, and
shrtl answer wiltti your blood, wr what was
fdone at 8toneyb«tter.''-J' Why, ftat is very
Ihmdi fsortcneiii 4srIwM net^ere^i-was

271]

86 GEORGE lU.

Trials qfihi Defend€rs —

[272

lOamilet oflF.'— « Yes, but you were there-
in contemplation of law-^consuhin^ about
Xhe abominable crimes of compassing the
king's death, and adhering to his enemies." —
' How, gentlemen, could I be there ? — I knew
not that there was any such meeting — I was
not present at it," — " Aye, but you were there
in contemplation of law, because you told
Lawler, that Brady would inform him, when
iJiere would be a meeting in Thomas- street ;
and because you told him so, you shall be
answerable with your life for what is done at
any meeting, at any distance of time, at any
place, by strangers whom you have never
seen or heard oh-- You have put vour name,
you have indorsed the treasonable purpose,
and through whatever number of persons it
inay pass, the growing interest of your crime
is accumulating against you, and you must pay
it with your blood, when it is demanded of
you/' — Gentlemen, before we shall have
learned to shed blood in sport — while death
and slaughter are yet not matter of pastime
among us, let us consider maturely before we
establish a rule of justice of this kind.^Ter-
rible rules, as we have seen them to be, when
weighed upon the day of retribution. • I con-
fess it is new to me. Whatever doctrines I
have learned, I have endeavoured to learn
them from the good sense, and humanity of
the Enelisb law ; — I have been taught, that
DO man^ life shall be sacrificed to Uie inge-
nuity of a scholium, and that even he, who
has heedlessly dropped tbe seed of guilt,
should not answer tor it with his blood, when
it has grown under the culture of other hands
from folly to crime, and from crime to trea-
son ; he shall not be called upon to answer
for the wicked faults of casual and accidental
folly. No, gentlemen,— I say it with confi-
dence,— the act which makes a man guilty
snust be his own ; or if it be by participation,
it must be by actual participation, not by con-
struction ; a construction which leads to an
endless confounding of persons and things.—
If I do an act myself, I am answerable for it :
' — If I do it by another I am answerable also.
If I strike the blow, I am answerable : If I
send an assassin, and he strikes the blow, it is
still my act, and I ought to be charged with
the criminality of it. —But if I go into a so-
ciety of men, into a club or a nlay-house, and
a crime be there committed, tnere is no prin-
ciple of law which shall bring home to me the
guilty conduct of those men which they may
pursue at any distance of time. — What pro-
tection can a miserable man have from my
dischargbg perhaps the ineffectual o£Bce of
my duty to him, if the ride laid down tiiat
every word he said, or was said by a man with
whom he ever had a conversation, shidl affect
liim at any distance of time ? Consider what
will be the consequence of establishing the pre-
cedent^ that a man shall always be responsible
for the act of the society to which he has once
belonged. Suppose 'a man heedlessly brought
i^to an associatioa wbeic ciiiDinAl purp<)se8 aip

going forward '—suppose there was what ha»
been stated, a society of men calling them*'
selves Defenders, and answering in fact to
the very singular picture drawn of them.
Will you give it abroad, that if a man once
belongs to a criminal confederacy, his case is
desperate — his retreat is cut on— that every
man once present at a meeting to subvert the-
govemment shall be answerable for eveiry
tning done at any distance of time by this
flagitious associaUon. What is the law in
this respect? — ^Asin the association there is
peril, so in the moment of retreat there i»
safety. What could this man have done P—*
He quitted the city— he went to another pirt
of the kingdom, when the treasonable acts
were committed ; yes, but he was virtually
among them. — ^What constitutes a man vir-
tually present, when he is physicallv absent ?
What IS the principle of law by which be shall
be tried f It can alone be tried by that, by
which the mandate or authority of any man is
brought home to him. — Bv previously sug-
gesting the crime, by which he becomes ai>
accessary before the fiict, and therefore s
principal in treason : for by suggestinjg the
crime he proves the concurrence of his will
with that of the parW committing the crime.
, —This is a maxim of law, that which in oitii^
nary felonies makes a man an accessary, in
treason will constitute him a principal, be-
cause in treason there are no accessaries.
Suppose a meeting held- for one purpose, and
a totally distinct crime is committed, are those
who an: at the first meeting accessaries T—
Certainly not; because they must be procu-
rers of the fiict done.— To make a man »
principal, he must be quodmnmodo aiding and
assisting — ^thatis not proved. What then is
the accessorial guilt ? Did the prisoner write
to the oUiers? — Does he appear to be tbe
leader of anv fraternity — the conductor of
any treasonable meeting P No such thing.
I sa^ when he quitted Dublin he had no in*
tention of giving aid, or countenance to any
meeting; thc^ connexion between him and*
the societies ceased, and there is no evidence
that he had any knowledge of any of their
subsequent acts. Unless there be positive
evidence against him, you ought to conader
him out or the sphere of any association.—
But still you make him answerable for what
was done : if you do that, you establish a ride
unknown to the sense or humanity of tlie
law; making him answerable for what was
done,. not by nimself, but by other persons.

Gentlemen, I feel that counsel, anxious as
they ought to be, may be led farther than
they intend ; in point of time I have pressed
fiuther than I foresaw upon the patience of Ihe
jury and the Court I say tbe object of this
part of the trial is, whether the ipiilt of any
thing which happened in that society be in
point of law broii»ht borne to.the prisoner f I
have endeayourecl to submit that the chai^
ought to be clear and the evidence exp|ieit»
aod that tbimsh the meetings at which

V3l

Jamei WMmfor High Treason*

A. D. 1795.

[?74

IjMTleratleii^ed were gtiiHy, Vet the prisoner
beiBg absent, was not affected by their crimi-
nality. Give me leave now, with deference,
to consider the case in another point of view.
I lay dien, from what has appeared in evl-
dence, the meetings themselves cannot in the
catiiiiation of law be guilty. If these meetings
mtt Dot provably guilty of treason, there can
be no retracted guilt upon the prisoner, even
if the communication between them and him
were proved. If there be no direct and ori-
eiiml gttih^if they do not that, which, if
aone by him, woulcl amount to an overt act of
treason, ^ fortiori^ it cannot extend to
hioi. Therefore let roe suppose, that the pri«
aooer were at the time present at these
meetings. Be pleased to examine this, whe-
ther if be were, the evidence given would
amoimt to the proof required. I conceive
that nothing can be more clear than the dis-
tinctioki between mere casual, indiscreet lan-
giuage, and language conveying a deliberated
and debated purpose. To give evidence of
overt acts, the evidence must be clear'and
direct How isHensey's* casef — ^a species
of evidence was adduced which it was im-
possible for any roan to deny : actual proof of
ccwiespondence found in his own writing and
possession. How was it in lord Preston'sf
case ?— evidence equally clear of a purpose
acted upon; going to another country for
that treasonable purpose. In every ca$)s of
which we read memorials in the law, the act
is such, that no man could say it is not an
overt act of the means used by tlM party in
efieduation of his guilty intent. But I said,
that a deliberate purpose expressed and acted
upon is different from a casual, indiscreet ex.
pression. Suppose now^ that the meeting were
all indicted for compassing the kill's death,
and that the overt act charged is, that they
consulted about giving aid to the king's ene-
mies actually at war. The guilt of all is the
gaik of each, there is no distinction between
them. If that meeting held that consultation,
they are all £uilty of diat species of high trea-
son. Gttt if the evidence were that at tiiat
meeting which consisted of as many as are
DOW here, one individual turned about to ano-
ther, and said ^ we must get arms to assist t!ie
French, when they come here." Would any
reasonable man say, that was a consultation
to adhere to the king's enemies P— a mere ca-
sual expression, not answered by any one«-
not addressed io the body?— Can it be sus-
tained for a moment in a court of justice that
it was a consultation to effect the death of the
king, or adhere to his enemies } — ^No, gen-
tlemen.—This is not matter of any deep or
proibond learning— it is familiar to the plain*
est imderstanding. The foolish language of
one servant in vour hall is not evidence to
aAet all the other servants- in yotir hoose :
it ie not the guilt of the rest I am aware, it

^ See itt'enl^, Vol. 19^ p. 1841.
+ gse'itetirsi Vol* If ^p. Ml^
VOL. XXVL

mav be the guilt of the rest; it may become,
such. But f rely upon this; I address it to
you with the confidence that mv own convic-
tion inspires ; that your lordships will state
to the jury, that a consultation upon a
subject IS a reciprocation of sentiment upon
the same subject. Every man understands
the meanine of a consultation: there is
no servant that cannot understand it. If a
man said to another, ** we will conspire to
kill the king," — no lacauey could mistake
it. But what is a consultation P — ^Why such
as a child could not mistake if it passed
before him. One saying to another, ** we
are here together, private friends — we an$
at war — the French may land, and 'Mf
they do, we will assist them." — To make
that a consultation there must be an assent
to the same thought; upon that assent
the guilt of the consultation is founded. Is
that proved by a casual expression of one
man, without the man to whom itwasdi^
rccted making anv answer, and when in fact
every other man but the person using the ea*
pression was attending for another purpose f
—'But if there be any force in what I hav6
said as applied to any man attending there^
how much more forcible will it ap|>ear, when
applied to a man, who was 100 miles distant
from the place of meeting. If the law be
clear, that there is no treason in hearing
treasonable designs and not consenting thereto
''—though it be another offence — unless he
goes there knowing before hand, the meeting
was to be — here, gentlemen, see how careliu
the law is, and how far it is from being un-
provided as to different cases of this kind; if
a man go to a meeting, knowing that the ob-
ject is to hatch a crime, he shall be joined
m the guilt ; if he go there and take a part,
without knowing previouslv he is involved :
though that has been doubted, Foster says,
" this is proper to be left to the jury, though
a party do or say nothing as to the consulta-
tion." If, for instance, a man knowing of ft
design to imprison the king, goes to a meet-
ing to consult for that purpose, his goihi^
there is an obvious proor of his assent and
encouragement. This is the law as laid down
by one of the most enliehtened writers in
any science. Compare Uiat doctrine with
what Mr. Attomev General wishes to incul-
cate, when he seeks to convict the prisoner.
There was a meeting in Barrack-street, and
it was treason, because they laughed.— As
Sancho said they all talked of me, because
they laughed. — But then there is a cate-
chism.—Aye, what say you to that?— Thb
Cock crew in France — » what say yon
to that?— Why I say it might be foolish,
it might be indecent to talk in this roanner^^
but what is the charge ? That he consulted to
kill the king^ Where was it he did that? At
Cork ! But did he not assist ^-^t^o, he was
not there r'^but he did assist, because he
cobHimnieated signs, and thus you collect the
gu0S«f the partyi as the coroner upon an in-

T

275]

36 GEORGB HL

Trials of the Drfenders^

[«7©

<)uest ofrnvrder, who thought a roan stand-
ing by wis guilty— why — bccaiiee three drooB
ofblood fell froin his nose. This was thougbt
to be invincible proof of his guilt. It remiods
me also of an old woman, who undertook to
prove that a ghost had appeared. — '* How do
you know there was a ghost in the room ?''
■»— " Oh ! I'll prove to you, tlicre roust have
been a gho^t- -for the very rooment I went
in, I fainted flat on the floor !*' — So says Mr.
Attorney General. " Oh, I'll convince you,
seutlemen, he designed to kill the king, for
He laughed." — ^\Velaon was chargeable with
aU the guilt of the roeetioe ; he laughed when
the paper was read, and said, when the
king's head was off there was an end of the
allegiance. In answer to that, I state the
humane good sense of the law, that in the
case of the life of a traitor, it is tender in pro-
portion to the abomination of the crime : for
the law of England, while it suspended the
aword of justice over the head oi the guilty
plan, threw its protection around the inno-
cent, to save bis loyalty from the danger of
such evidence : it did taot^ — it threw its pro-
tection around him whosf. ikmocemce uioht

BB DOUBTED, BUT WHO WAS NOT PBOlfED TO BB

ouiLTY. The mild and lenient policy of the
law discharges a man from the necessity of
proving his innocence, because otherwise it
would Took as if the jury were impanelled to
condemn upon accusation without evidence
in support of it, but merely because he did
not prove himself innocent. Therefore, gen-
tlemen, I come round again to state what the
law is. In order to make a general assem-
bling and consultation evidence of overt acts,
there must be that assembling and the guilt
must be marked by that consmtation in order
.to charge any man, who was present and did
not say any thing concurring with the guilt
of that consultation. It is necessary that he
should have notice that the guilty purpose
.was to be debated upon :— that the meeting
was convened for that purpose, fiut let me
jnecall your attention to thb, and you will feel
it bearing strongly upon that case. The
silence ot a man at such a meeting is
not criminal to the degree here charged.
Then suppose his disclaimer necessary —
suppose the law considered every man as
abetting what he did not disavow, remember
that the wretch now sought to be affected by
his silence at a meeting, was IOC) miles distant
from it. ^ There might liave been a purpose
from which bis soul had recoiled. — Is this
then evidence upon which to convict the pri-
soner?— There is no statement of any par-
ticular purpose — no summons to confer upon
any particular purpose— no authority given
toany meeting Dy a deputy named— and let
me remind voU| that at the last meeting, if
there were the gossipings and communi cations
you have heara, there was not any one man
present who attended the first meeting, nor
IS there any evidence to show, that the pri-
soner had ever spoken to any one man who

attended the last meeting, upon any occasion,
and yet the monstrous absurdity contended
for is, that although Weldon proposed no
subject for discussion— although he proposed
no meeting^although he did not know that
any purpose was to be carried into efi'ect, be-
cause he was then 100 miles off, he is still to
suffer for the foolish babble of one individual
to another.

You are to put all the proceedings together,
and out of the tissue of this talk, hearsay and
conjecture, you are to collect the materials of
a verdict, by which you directly swear, that
the man is guilty of compassing the king's
death. But supp|ose a man were to suggest a
treasonable meeting — that the meeting takes
place and he does not go — the first proposal
may amount to evidence of treason if it went
far enough, and amounted to an incitement
— but suppose the meeting held be a distinct
one from that which was suggested, and the
party does not attend, it appears to me, that
the act of that meeting cannot be considered
as his overt act. The previous incitement
must be clearly established by evidence, and
I rely upon it, that the subsequent acts of
that meeting, to which I am supposing he did
not go, partictdarly if it be a meeting at which
many others were present who were not at the
first, I rely upon it, I sav, that no declaration
of any man (and more decidedly if it be by a
man nut pnvy to the original declaration),
can be evidence upon whicn a jury can attach
guilt to the part^. It is nothing more than a
misfeasance, wmch is certainly criminal, but -
not to the extent of this charge. To affect
any man by subsequent debate, it must be
with notice of the purpose^ and if the meeting
he dictated b^ himself, it is only in that point
he can be guilty ; because if you propiose a
meeting for one purpose, you shall not be af-
fected oy any other — no matter what the
meeting is^ however treasonable, or bad;
unless you knew before for what purpose they
assembled, you cannot be guilty virtually by
what they have done.

Gentlemen, I do not see that any thing
farther occurs to me upon the law of the
case, that I have not endeavoured in some
way to submit to you : — perhaps I have been
going back somewhat irregularly. There re-
mains only one, and that a very narrow sub«
ject of observation. I said that the evidence
upon which the life, and the fame and the
property of a man should be decided and ex-
tinguished, ought to be of itself, evidence of
a most cogent and impressive nature. Gen-
tlemen, does it appear to you that the witness
whom you saw upon the table comes under
that description.— Has he sworn tfuly?*— If
he has — ^What has he told you? As soon as
he discovered the extent of the guilt, he
quitted the fratemitv.— Do you believe that?
—Hart told him that all the Protestants
were to be massacred. '^ I did not hke,^ said
he, " the notion of massjicpeing all."— Here
is the (picture hs draws of himself— be an ac-

2771

Jamet Wddonfor High Treason.

A. D. 1795.

[278

complice m the guih — I did not ask him,
** have you been promised a pardon ?" — I did
not ask him, ** are you coming^ to swear by
the acre?" — But I appeal to Ine picture he
drew of himself upon the table— what worked
)ns contrition? — Is it the massacre of one
wretch ? — He was unappalled at the idea of
dipping his hands, ana lapniug the blood of
fart of Uie Protestant body — it was only
lieaps of festerine dead, that nauseated his
appetite, and wonced his repentance and con-
Tersion-^is your verdict to be founded upon
the unsupported evidence of a wretch of that
kind? His stomach stood a partial thassacre
— it was only an universal deluge of blood
that made him a convert to humanity ! And
he b now, the honest, disinterested and loyal
witness in a court of justice.— What said he
farther ? — As soon as 1 found from Hart tbeir
schem<», I went to Mr. Cowan. You saw,
gentlemen, that he felt mv motive in asking
the question — ^* you abandoned them as soon
as joa found their criminality." — Because had
ha answered otherwise he would have de-
stroyed his credit; but as it is he has thrown
his credit, and the foundation of it overboard.
If Lawler be innocent, Weldon must be so —
he saw that, and therefore he said, he thought
il no crime to kill the king — therefore, gen-
tlemen, my coilscience told me, that if he
felt no remorse at plunging a dagger into the
heart of his king, he would feel no trembling
hesitation at plunging a dagger into the breast
of an indtviaual subject by penured testi-
mony. Those workings of the heart which

asitate the feelings at the untimely fate of a
fellow creature touch not him, and he could
behold with delight, the perishing of that man
who had a knoivleage of his gutlt. He has
no compunction, and he betrays no reluctance
at drinking deep in the torrent of human
blood, provided it leaves a remnant of the
class. What stipulation can you make be-
tween a wretch of that kind, and the sacred
obligation of an oath ? You are to swear upon
his oath — a Vetdict is not to be founded upon
your own loyalty — not upon what vou have
seen or heard spoken disrespectfully of the
govemrtent or tne king. Your honest, pure.
and constitutional verdict can be founded
only upon that sympathy that you feel be-
tween your own hearts, and the credibility of
the witness. It is a question for you— will
you hazard that oath upon the conscience of
such a man?— A man influenced by hope and
agitated with fear— anxious for life, and afraid
to die, ' that you may safely say " we have
heard a witness, he stated facts which we
could not believe;— he is a wretch: for he
thought it no crime to murder his king, and
a partial massacre appeared to him to be me*
ritorioiia!*' Is it upon the testimony of that
nefarious miscreant— the ready traitor — the
frotol^ murderer — I retract not the expres-
sion, if I did, it would be to put in its place a
word of more emphatic and combined repro-
batioii— u it upoii that evidence, I say, you

will pronotmce a verdict, establishing the
most aggravated degree of criminality known
to our Taw upon the person of that man, sup-
posed by the law to be innocent until his guih
fee proved ? — I know not whether the man be
a good subject or a bad one : it is not neces-
sary for me to know, nor for you to inquire ;
but I exhort you, finally, to remember, that
in Great Britain, so anxious has the law been
to guard against the perfidiou^ftiess of such
men, that no less than two concurrent wit-
nesses arc necessary there in cases of treason
— I call not upon you to adopt that law ; but
to show you the principle, that there should
be strong evidence satisfying the mind of a
jury. I commit the decision of this case to
your consciences, not to your humanity — I
commit it to your determination upon the
sound principles of justice and law.

After Mr. Curran had sat down, he rose
again, and said he had closed without statins
any evidence from a conviction, that it woula
be unnecessary — It is desired to produce
some evidence which I will not oppose in a '
case of life — There is evidence to snow that
Lawler is not credible.

Samuel Galland was then called, and sworn
on the part of the prisoner, but was not et-
aminea.

Jmmu Reynolds sworn. — Examined by Mr.

M'Nally

Do you know the prisoner ?-^I have known
him for 17 years.

What has been his general character? —
I never heard of any thing improper, be-
fore this trial— he worked as a breeches-
maker, and was an industrious man.

2'homas 0*Neilj sworn.— Examined by Mr.

M'Naliy

Do you know the prisoner? — I do.

How long have you known him ?— I have
known him 30 years.

What has been his general character?— A
very good one : he was an honest, laborious
man.

Mr. M^Nallv then addressed the jury in a
short speech for the prisoner, apologizing for
his brevity, by stating that he was much in-
disposed, and that any exertion upon his part
was rendered less necessary by the very
splendid defence by Mr. Curran.

Mr. Prime Serjeant in reply, spoke to the
evidence very fully.

Mr. Justice Finueane. — Gentlemen of the
Jury; In this case James Weldon stands in-
dicted of two species of treason, declared to
be such by the stat. 25 Ed. 3rd. One of these
is for compassing and imagining the death
ol the king ; and the other is for adhering to
the king's enemies. Now, gentlemen, as to
the first of these charges, that of compassing
the king's death, such is the anxious care
with which the life of the Hing is guarded by
our law, that the offence is not confined to
actS; or attempts directly agaiMt the life of

S79J

36 GEORGE IIL

Trials qflhe Defmdtn^

[seo

tbe king, as b;^ lying in wait to assasiinate,
or by murdering, but it extends to avery
thing deliberately done, by which the life of
the king niieht be endangered. Thus, it has
been always neld, and bnow well established,
that all attempts to dethrone or imprison the
king axe overt acts of compassing his death ;
for all ex,perience9 and all nistory show, that
the necessary consequence of such dethrone-
ment or imprisonment has been the death of
the king.— So also, adhering to the kin£*s
enemies, or encouraging them to invade the
kingdom, are overt acts of imagining his
death; and that I take it, does fairly follow
Xxj^ the conviction of every man, when he oon*
s^n that the ultiopate object of the king's
public enemies is his death and destruction.
Tbe king is the first soldier of the state, and
the sword of the enemy is a3 much levelled
at bis life, as at that of any soldier in his
army ; ajod therefore every act of adhering,
countenance, or assistance to the kin^s ene-
mies^ does necessarily fall under that oranch
of the statiAte, which makes the oflence of
compassing and imagining the death of the
kmg. Therefore, gentlemen, although these
two offences are m9de distinct by the statute,
compassing his death, and adhering to his
enemies, yet every overt act, which proves
the person adhering to the king's enemies,
is also an owt act of compassing the death
of the king.

By overt act, nothing more is meant, than
an act done by the party to efifect his treason*
able intent It is called «n overt act, that is,
an open act, the means used by the party to
accomplish his treason, that is to say, to put
the kmg to death, or adhere to the king's
enemies. No man is answerable for the tacit
imagination of his hearty unless he does
something to effect his traitorous intent. To
God alone, the learcber of all hearts, is he
a^wenable for his thoughts and intentions.
But human tribunals cannot take cognizance
of thoughttf except so far as they are mani-
fasted by acts. Therefore in every indictment
of treason, the overt acts, the means used to
effect the purpose, must be set forth, because
it, is against tnem, the accused is to make his
de£snpe. But though the indictment should,
as it generally does, state several overt acts, as
means used by the party to effect hi^ purpose
yet, if there be any one applicable to the
treason charged, it is sufficient. Now, gen-
tlemen, in the present indictment, the overt
actS) of both species of treason are one
aiid the same ; and from what I before men-
tioned, thev may be so, as every act of adher-
ing to the king's enemies, is an overt act of
compassing the kmg'sdeaUi. Tlie overt acts in
thia indictment are these : first, after reciting
that a war is depending between the king ana
the persona exercising the powers of govern-
ment in France,(aad here X must observe, that
although no proof be given of a war existing
between the king ' and the persons exercising
the fQw^^s ^Igovariunent m France, yet the

notoriety of the fiict is sufficient evulenceolit)
the indictment, I say, recites thewar,andthea
charges that the prisoner did unite with &lae
traitors called Defenders, and beoome one of
a party to aid the French, in case they should
invade this kinedom. This is stated as tha
manner in which he intended to carry into ef.
feet his traitorous purpose. Secondly, that he
did consult with other traitors unknown, in
the joining and assisting with the Irench.
Thirdly, that he did unite v^th traitors un-
known, and becomeone of a party i^led De-
fenders, united to subvert the govermnent as
by law established. But, gentlemen, this
overt act being tbua laid, not atating that
there was any plan formed to effect it by
force, we are of opinion, that this overt act
does not fsll within either species of treason ;
therefore vou are not to apply vour consider-
ation to that overt act. The fourth is to the
same purport, and you will also put it out of
your consideration, that he did unite with
others unknown to subvert the Protestant se«
ligion, and consult about the means, &c. Hia
court are of opinion, that does not form any
overt act of compassing the klne's death, or
adhering to his enemies. The nflh is, that
the prisoner did, with other traitors unknown
in order to enlist Wilham Lawler,tobeaidinfl
and assisting the French, in case they should
invade this kingdom, administer an unlawful
oath. I will not read this to you "now, gentle-
mcn,b€cause, wheni stale the evidence^ shall
lay it before ^ou in its proper place. The
sixth is, that m order to procure and enlist
Y/illiam Lawler to aid the French, ho did ad-
minister and instruct him to repeat an oatb,
declaration or catechism, which I will also
state by-and-by* The seventh overt act re-
lates to a conspiracy to subvert the govern*
ment, and not being laid to bo intended by
force, you will throw it out of your consideca*
tion. The eighth is, that to procure Willian
Lawler to assist th^ itencb, he adnMoistared
an oath to him.

These, gentlemen, ere the overt acta laid in
the indictn^ent, and in my apprehension^
those, which are material for your considmr
tion, may be classed under two beads : First,
that he did unite with Defenders, and meet
and consult with them, for the purpose of
joining and assisting the French, ia case they
shoula invado this kmgdom. Secondly, that
he did administer a certain oath and engpgfs*
ment to Lawler, to enlist, bind, and enga^
him to aid and assist the Fieafih, in case tbif
should invade this kingdom. These two 9p^
cies of overt acts, are clear overt acts of ad-
hering to \b» king^s enemies, which iaone of
tbe treasons ;^^aa that if this indictpient, did
not charge the treason of compas^ag and
imasining the death of the king» c^n waa
connned- solely to the charge of adrairijag. ta
his enemies that speoies ofVeasMn, if proved
will be clearly supported. Xherefov!e„ gentle
men, if it spould t^pear^ b^ond «U doubU
that these acta wei^a donn bx tt^r prittVW ^

S8IJ

Jama WddiMf&r Hi^h Treason.

A. IX 1795.

[282

Mif oueof Uiero, Ifaea the piBooer is, clearly
guilty of adberiDg to the kin(^*s enemies ; ao4
alao guilty of the other species, not directly,
but by consequence. But unless you sbiul
be perfectly satisfied, that they, or some of
thflioi were done, and that his object was to
a^sisl the French, whatever other objects he
had, you must acquit him of the offence
charged.

.It will be now your duty, to conuder the
evidence most minutely ; and for this purpose
I will state the evidence which has been
given in this case* The first witness for the
crown, was William lawler : he mentioned —
(Here his Igrdaliip recapitulated the evidence
with the utmost accuracy and precision. His
lordship also read the papers as stated in the
indictxnentaad proveU,and then proceeded.)
If yoU} gentlemen, are satisfied, that this was
an engaaement to biud this man to ud the
National Convention of France, it is a dear
overt act of adhering to the king^s enemies ;
because it is procuring another person to as-
sist the enemies of the king, if you shall he
of opiaioQ, that the words Sational Coawe*
iwm mean the Natiouai Convention of
Fcaore, and if you believe that it was put
to this man. Another object of the paper

is io destroy all ^. If you shall' oe of

opinion, that the blank'is to be filled up with
the word '* King^** it goes Io substantiate the
other species of treason in the indictment,
because our king is included in the number,
and every act doneio dethrone the king is com-
ftcebcnded in that species of treason of com-
passing his death. Then the other pa|)er, to
vrbich the witness says be was sjvorn together
with the engagement, states that the. person
taking it is ** to be true and faithful to king
Cieorge the 3rd, wkiUt I live under ike same
gfiBoertmuidy These weirds are deservingof your
coasideratkHi, because it is a Qualification of
the engagement, only, wkHH he lives under
the anMegovernoBent, and how fer other parts
also quahly it, and make it pleasing and
agpeeabie Io others, ie also for your coasiden^
tien. Now, to be 8ure„ if this oath were taken
alooeaad by itself, there is nothine in the
terins of it, that could lend in any aegree to
8M|iport the overt ads charged in the mdiet-
menl. But connecting it with the test taken
at the same time, it deserves a very difierent
consideration ; and it will be ibr vom, gentle-
men, tu consider how £ir one throws light
upon the other. If the object of them be to
huul tikis man to the National Convention to
dethrone all kings there can be no doubt, that
they support the tteaaon charged in the in-
dictoMOt.

After the oath waa taken, the witness men-
tioned to you. that Brady aaked the pfisoner,
if he knew any person imio was to headtfaem^
wbe« they rose ; that he aASvcfed there was
qse^iothe North. Tbeie is no oiveitact of aris-
ing, c«r a coQs^ifa^ te^rise : but if you believe^
that this rising was to aid the puspoieB of^
smelyt and te aiA the f reai^ It goes In aotp*

port the overt acts. (Here his lordship stated
the remainder of the evidence for the Crown^
and that which was given on the part of the
prisoner). Here, eentlemen, the evidence
closed. It would add materially to the weight
of it, if alderman James showed, how he ac-
quired iutelli^eoce of these papers being upoo
tne person ol Kennedy. If Lawler told it to
him, or to any other person, it would add to
his testimony, because connecting it with his
testimony, it would fortify what he said upon
his direct testimony, that he saw them with
Kennedy. But consider whether it is possible
the information could have come from any
otber'quarter. However at the same time,
vou are also to consider whether it might not
be an after thought You are to determine,
from the whole testimony of Lawler, and the
credit you give to him.

Then it is askeil, what is the word De&n-
der. There is nothing criminal in the word
itself, — it is a name assumed by a set of per-
sons. But the question is, what are the pas«
poses and designs of these people ?— Of that
you are the proper judges. It their designs
and intentions were, to adhere to the French
and to support them, the charge of adhering
to the king's enemies is supported. If their
designs were not such, the indictment is not
supported. But considering the oath and the
test together ; supposing them administeied,
as sworn by Lawler, they show veiy strongly
what their designs were ; — that they designed
to adhere to the National ConventioB of
France, if you believe those words mean the
convention of France,— and part is to de-
throne all kings, if you believe that the blank
is to be filled up ; that shows the desijgn of
the Defenders, and the witness if believed,
shows the design of this man^ in administer-
ing it What were their designs farther ap*
pears from what Hart declared aloud, at Sto-
ney baiter; for he declared aloud that they
were to get arms to assist the French. 80 that
there he declared what the object was. The
oath and test declares it also, if you believe tho
evidence of Lawler.

But it is objected, that the acts for which a
man ia to answer, must be his own, and that
tho prisoner was not present at those dechi-
ratKMis. But here are his own acts, if yo«i
believe the witness, for be is charged with adU
ministering this oath and teal, an en^ge-
ment to assist the National Convention, and
to dethrone all kings, if you believe these ex-
pressions, and the blank are to be so applied.
Whatever the designs of the papeit weve^
they are declared by the prisoner, to be de-
signs of Defendera, and to be bis own prinel>
pka and designs. So that if it appears lirem
hisownactSt it is brooghtbeaie tehhnself,
and the di^lacation of the prisoner agfeea
with Uie deelantion of Hart;^-if tb^ do,
Hart ifl a Defender, and explains what the ob-
ject of the teat is, namely, to raise amsfor
tbeFeeock But this is said not tobeacon-
apiia^, ualasa it waa acoosultBlioft or gene

283]

36 GEORGE III.

Trials of the De/enders^^

[284

ral talk by a meeting. Why, cerlainly, it
may, or may not afiect a person present, ac-
cording to the circumstances of the case, of
vrbtch you are the proper judges. But here it
is sworn, if you believe the evidence, that
Hart spoke aloud in the Qieeting, and desired
those present, to go out for arms. That was
a communication with the whole company,
— to seize arms to enable them to be more as-
sisting to the French. This is the explana-
tion which Hart put upon it himself, in the
hearing of the company, and assented to by
the company, for tney go away to get arms.
Then he tells you, that some of the company
remained, and those who went away not re-
turning immediately, such as remained were
sworn m the manner he described, that they
would attend on the Motiday following, with
arms, to go and seize arms.

That Is an act done by Hart not to an indi-
vidu^, but addressed to such of the body as
remained, and was assented to by them all.
But, gentlemen,! only mention this as obvi-
ating a difficulty thrown out by the counsel.
But tlie whole is for your consideration, and
I cannot but observe, that all depends upon
the testimony of lawler, Certainly one
single witness is competent to prove the
crime of high treason, although it is other-
wise in England : but we must ^6 according
to the law of this country, by which one wit-
ness is competent to prove the fact. But
I say the whole depends upon the testi-
inony of Lawler, and before you find a ver-
dict upon his testimony, you must be satisfied
withtbe tmthofit. It has been stated, and
no doubt the fact is so, that he is a witness
subject to great objections. By his own con-
fession, he is an accomplice in the treason.
By his own confession, at one time he would
not scruple to attempt tlie life of the king.
At present, he is of a different way of think-
ing. Also by his own confession, he did not
shudder at the idea of shedding Protestant
blood, but that he stopped at the idea of mas-
aacreing aU, These are certainly strong ob-
jections to impeach the character of the wit-
ness. This man is a competent witness, and
80 far a credible one, because if he were not
credible, it would not be of any utility to ex-
amine him. You, gentlemen, have beard his
story, and you have seen the manner in which
be told it to vou ; that is matter for you to
consider, and to balance against the objec*
tions urged to impeach his character. There
is no attempt made to discredit the man by
producing evidence against him . It has been
sud, that there has been no attempt by the
prisoner to show he was not at the time in
sarrack-streeky where the oath was adminis-
tered, that fact being capable of proof, and in
that respect, to disprove what was said by Law-
ler. But that receives this answer, and a very
full one in my opinion, that no particular time
is stated, and therefore he could not be pre-
pared wiUi tbt proof which has been mention*
ed. Witnesses have be€«i examined to the

ftrisoner's character, but such evidence is of
ittle weight in this case.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain, — Gentlemen of
the Jury. I think it my duty, upon a case of
this importance, to make some few observa-
tions ; out I shall neither recite the indict-
ment, nor the evidence, which have t)een pre-
cisely stated to you already by Mr. Justice
Finucane, and I think he has accurately stated
the law to you. However, it might be thought
a dereliction of my duty, if I did not say some-
thing upon a case of such vast importance.
There are two charges in this indictment, one
is, coropa5<sing the death of the king ; — the
other is adhering to the kine's enemies, now
at open war. There can be no doubt that
every mean taken to adhere to the king*s ene-
mies is an overt act, or in other words a mean
of compassing the death of the king. But it
is by construction it is so. It is so settled by
a train of authorities, and cannot be disputed ;
but I do not think it necessary to trouble you
with that branch of the statute. I shall con-
fine myself to the branch of adhering to the
king's enemies, because it is plain to every
man, and cannot be mistaken ; for every man
must see at once, what is and what is not, ad-
hering to the king*s enemies. Gentlemen,
there are several overt acts stated, but I think
they may be reduced to two, because the rest
are derivative from them. The first is this,
that the prisoner did, in order to enlist and
procure William Lawler to be aiding and as-
sisting the French, the enemies of the king,
administer an oath of the import you have
heard. By that oath, Lawler undertook, of
his own good will, to be true to his majesty,
king George the drd, whilst he should live
under the government. Lawler was, without
that oath, bound to allegiance, during the joint
livesof himself and the king; and what was
the reason of shortening the duration of the
allegiance, is, I think, inferrable from the ex-
prcssions, because wherever he should go, it
was his bounden duty to preserve his alle-
giance to the king ; and Lawler is made by
this oath, declaration, or catechism, call
it what you will, to be obedient to superior of-
ficers, to committees and others. Who were
these committees and superior officers meant
by this instrument, is for your consideration.
In my apprehension, it is upon the face of it,
internal evidence, that some association of an
unlawful nature was on foot There is no ac-
count given of it by the prisoner ; but ex vi
ierminorum it implies, that some association
was on foot, and some superiors appointed,
but how created, or what the committees
were, does not appear from the instrument.
But the witness nas explained, what tliey
meant by committee-men, and all that is evi-'
dence to go to you, and the instrument ap-
pears to reflect credit upon the witness in his
exfXMition of it. There is another part of it,
which is an engagement to meet, when the
committee pleases. So that here is an en-
gagement upon oath, to attend such conven*

2851

Jam€S Weldimjor High Treason.

A. D. 1795.

[886

tion» of this body as the committes requires,
aody ^ntlemeOy if you believe that, my opi-
nion IS, that any persons being assembled,
using private confidential signals, com muni-
cated by the prisoner, they are evidence to go
to you, serving; as a comment upon the in-
strument, if It required one; — it is supple-
mental evidence to show what the intention
of the prisoner was in administering this oath,
provided you believe he did so.

This is one of the overt acts. Another of
the overt acts is, that he did with intent to
eolbt and persuade Lawler to be aiding the
French, traitorously administer another oath,
which you have heard more than once repeat-
ed. The strikins parts are these :•— Lawler
binds himself by this instrument, under the
obligation of an oatli, '< to quell all nations,''
«»'* dethrone all kings,'' — and *' to be con-
cerned with the National Coovention." — The
innuendo as laid is perfectly plain and natural;
but you, gentlemen, are the judges whether
i t is plain, natural, and obvious or not. In my
ppimon, no other possible innuendo could ho
stated. This instrument being entered into
at one and the same time with the other, may
serve as a comment upon tbe other :~they
may be considered as one and the same in-
atrumenty and if there be any thing ambiguous
in either, you may consider them together,
and see whether they do or not bind the par-
ties taking them, under a solemn engagement
to assist tne French convention. If you be-
lieve that, the inference necessarily follows,
that you must be satisfied of the intent. But
I think it would be refinement to go farther
than the instrument itself, and if you believe
these engagements were entered into bv Law-
ler, and that they were administered by the
prisoner, binding him thereto, I think upon
the face of the mstrument itself, the traitor-
ous intent is appmrent. But, gentlemen, it is
not the only evidence, because i have said
that the acts of persons, in the secrets of the
prisoner, will serve you to eiplain this paper,
and this, as to the law of the ease is the whole
of it ; and I believe there never was a case in-
volving less law in it. It is a plain and mani-
fest adherence to the king's enemies, provided
you understand this paper as I do.

But now, gentlemen, there is certainly a
questbn very material, not only to the pri-
soner, but to the community, and that is, what
degree of credit a man, standing in the situa-
tion of Lawler, is entitled to? — He is an ao-
compHre coming into court, admitting him-
self guilty of a crime, of which if convicted,
he could not be received; and acknowledging,
that so debased was his mind, that he did not
think it any crime to murder his kin^-^that
the schemes he was embarked in might be
attended with tbe murder of several of his
Protestant brethren :~These, gentlemen, are
•erious objections. One of the most impres-
sive obligations of an oath cannot be supposed
to e&bt in this case — the moral obIigatk>n of it
.'—because you cannot conceive that the mind

of a man, embarked in such a conspiracy, is in-
fluenced by moral motives. See also, whe*
ther he be not deeply interested — whether he
might not accuse an innocent man to save
himself. But that objection is not so strong
here as in ordinary cases, because the man
was not in custody when he disclosed this
charge ; because if he were, undoubtedly bis
swearing to this matter would be more ques-
tionable, than if he were at large. These, gen-
tlemen, are considerations which certainly call
for your deepest attention. There is another
matter which I must submit to you, and that
is, whether this man's testimony, in his ac-
cusation of the prisoner, is in any measure
corroborated by other circumstances; fbr it is
seldom to be found in the history of our law,
that any jury has ventured, upon the single
unsupported testimony of an accomplice, to
find a person guilty. You may perceive, how*
ever, that treason and conspiracy must often
go unpunished, if the law laid it down uni-
versally, that a jury should not act upon the
testimony of an accomplice. Juries do fre- '
quentiy act upon such evidence, and with the
concurrence of the ablest and best of judges ;
and it has been decided by judges in both
countries, that a jury may do so, but it is their
duty to examine it most attentively ; and I
must say, that it has very seldom happened,
that a jury has found a verdict of conviction
upon such single testimony alone. Now see
whether there be any circumstance to corro-
borate him. He said, that the papers, which
he identified, were in the possession of Tho-
mas Kennedy ; and Mr. Oliver Carleton baa
sworn, that he did find these very papers, to
which Lawler stated he was sworn, in the
possession of Kennedy. Now, certainly, gen-
tlemen, it must strike you most obviously,
that this is more confirmatory of tbe testi-
mony against Kennedy, than against Weldon.
and his testimony may be well confirmed
against Kennedy, and not against the priso-
ner at the bar. There is evidence to confirm
this man's testimony as to one person charged,
and not as to others. I must exhort you then,
to attend to his testimony, and see whether
it be consistent in all its parts, and to recol-
lect the manner in which it was given, and if
your understandings are absolutely coerced to
believe him, then you must find the prisoner
guilty. But if from the special circumstances
any rational doubt rests upon your minds, it
will be your duty to acquit the prisoner.

Mr. Baron Gcor^e.-^Oentlemen of the
Jury; I can say, and I am sure with great
truth, Uiat it is scarcely necessary or possible
to add any thing to what you have heard from
the charges of the two judges, who have ad*
dressed you. But, gentlemen, I think it my
duty to submit a very few short observationi
to you.

Gentlemen, it appears that by far the roost
important consideration for you is^ <' what do*
greeof credit isdue to thetestimopy of Lawler."
For this purpose you are to consider the ac-

S87]

38 GEORGE m.

Trkls nfihe Veftnderi^

[288

count eiven of himself, and tli# appearance
he maoe upon the table this day. You will
recollect his having mentioned, that he went
over to the neichbouring kingdom, and there
became a memoerofthe Corresponding So*
ciety — that he obtained a letter from Mr.
Eaton to Mr. Rowan, which he delivered, aiKl
you have heard the manner in which he has
conducted himself since, from the account he
has given you of himself. Gentlemen, it
must, no doubt, be a very great stain upon the
character of any man, and a blemish upon his
credit, that be had, at any period of his life
(and that at no distant one), consented to as-
sist in the murder of his king, and of many of
his fellow-subjects who never did him any in-
jury. However, jgentleraen, you will also con-
sider what led him to remorse, whether the
discovery was made for the purpose of justice,
or lo protect himself from the consequences
of that conspiracy. Consider how far it is
probable that this man might entertam
these designs, and relinquish them after-
wards, when the period tor carrying them
into effect approached nearer to him. I say,

gsntiemcn, the offence which he confesses
tmself capable of entertuning and of carry-
ing into execution must leave a stain upon his
cralit; therefore you are to hear his evidence
with the greatest caution. You will also re-
collect, that when it was put to him upon the
table, whether he had declared certain
impious opinions, how he hesitated.

No douDt, gentlemen, it was the duty of the
Court, to prevent the question being urged, as
not being perfectly legal, but juries and judges
have their eye-sight, and they are to be
governed by their senses, and if it be shown to
YOU, that his moral character, is exceptionable,
bis religious character is liable to exception
also. Ihen, gentlemen, you will take the
account of the transactions he mentioned
from his account, and the manner in which he

Sve it, and connect them with the other evi«
nee produced. No doubt, there has been
no witness examined, to say this roan is not
to be believed upon his oath : nor is his tes-
timony contradicted; nor upon his cross-
examination does he appear to have contra-
dicted himself. Gentlemen, you will aJso
oonsider, whether he is corroborated in his
testimony, — and how far he is so you are the
constitutional judges,— by the testimony of
Mr. Carteton. He says, he was directed by
the magistrate to search the fob of Kennedy,
upon whom the oath and the catechism were
mmd ; it does not appear how the magistrate
came by that information, to know where
that oath and catechism were so deposited.
But the witness Lawler swore, that they
tMre the identical papers upon which he
was swom, and that be saw them a fortnight
after he was sworn, in the possession of
Reimtdy. It must undoubtedly be, that the
magurtraregetthe information from Lawler^
Of sofBo otEevpersotok
Judge FiiMeane haa saidi thai if it ap-

peared by evidence, that Lawier had told it
before the arrest, it would strengthen ht8=
testimony more than if it appeared from any
other quarter. You, gentlemen, are the
judges to determine upon the weight of our
observations, to consider the facts and
circumstances of the case, and decide upon
them all, according to your consciences.

Gentlemen, in this indictment there are
two offences laid. But in my humble appret
hension that ofience to which you oi^t to
direct your attention, is that of adbermg to
the king's enemies ; and kiefore you can hnd
the prisoner guilty of that ofience you must
sec, that some one of the overt acts of that
species of treason has been proved ; and in
order that you may not be embarrassed by
any matter of refinement, or have your under^
standings entangled 1^ construction, yon
ought to direct your attention to those overt
acts, which charge the prisoner with having,
in order to procure Lawler to be aidlne to the
French, in case they should invade Ireland,
administered to him the oath you have
heard ; and taueht him to rehearse the cate-^
chism you have heard. These are two of the
overt acts, and if it appear that the prisoner
did those acts, with the treasonable purpose
imputed to him, you will be bound to nnd him
guilty. Gentlemen, the proof of having ad-
ministered that oath and teaching Lawler to
rehearse that catechism consists of the evi-'>
deuce of the things said and done at Barrack-*
street. — ^The contents of the oath and cate-
chism have been very fairly commented upon
from the bench ; therefore I sh^l make no
farther observation upon them than this, that
as to the oath, the indictment lays the
ofience as if administered only in a single in-
stance to Lawler, but the form of the oath
shows that more was intended than is laid in
the indictment, because it is not merely the
form of an oath to be used in that instance
only, but it begins, ** I, A. B,'* showing that
it was not to stop with him, but was intended
to swear as many as the purposes of the party
mieht require.

Gentlemen, if there be any thine equivocal
in the oath and catechism, you will look into
the rest of the evidence to explain it, and I do
think, that most of the evidence given can be
useful for no other purpose than as matter of
explanation, in case any doubt is raised upon
your minds. The oath, the catechism— the
signs used->the pass-word— appear to have
been the test ana tokens by which Lawler
was admitted to the several associations which

he attended. ^And, gentlemen, lest it

should be mistaken by you or any other per-
son, it is right to settle that matter expltettly.
I think you are to consider the other evidence,
which vou have heard of what was done in
the other assemblies, subsequent to that in
Barrack-street, as explanatory of what wai
done in the assemUy at Barrack-street. Be-
cause it appears, that Lawler was admitted
into those subsequeni aseemblies in conae^

ass]

Jama WMmfor H^h Treason.

A. D. 1795.

[S90

queue* of the signak communicated to
him ar Barrack-street. — He was known by
one of the parly to have been sworn in.
If there were any thing doubtful, I -say,
what passed in those several assemblies, to
which the witness got admittance, will be fair
matter to- explain what passed at the first.
And U it were proved, that the designs of
these subsequent assemblies, were inno-
cent and lawful, that would, oa the part of
the prisoner^ clear up the transaction in Bar-
rack-street, if there were any thing doubtful
in it. Then, gentlemen, if there be any thing
doubtful, and it appears that by the means
imparted to him he got admittance into as-
semblies where treasonable practices were
going forward, will not that be evidence to
ahow the object of the proceeding in Barrack-
street f. Therefore you see, that if the ori-
ginal transaction was criminal, the subsequent
]iroceedings explain his guilt; and if they
were innocent, they will shew his innocence.
Tberefore, gentlemen, I think the Court were
right in lettmg in that evidence, to give all
the light to £e case which the law allows.
Gentlemen, ^o» afe to consider this case
under all its circumstances; and you are to
consider, and be satisfied with the account

Siven by Lawler upon the table ; you are to
etermioe, whether you think it true or false ;
and if, under the circumstances, vou believe it
to be true, you are bound to find the prisoner
guiltv;— but if you feel such a doubt as rea-
aonaole men may entertain, you are then
bound to acquit him.

[The Jury then retired, and came back in
about twenty minutes.]

Ckrk (fihtCroam, — How say ye, gentle-
mca of the Jury, have ye agreed to your ver-
dict?

Jury .r— We have.

Clerk qJ ikt Cro«a.^Who shall say for
you?

Jtcr^d — Our foreman.

QUrkef Ih^ Crovti.— Gaoler, make a bar,
set James Weldon forward — How say vou,
gentlemen of the Jury, is James Weldon
guilty of the treason whereof he stands in-
dicted, or not P

JbrcMfla^—Guilty.

The prisoner was thereupon brought back
to Newgate^ and the Court adjourn^ to next
aay. ,

Wedne»day^ December 30th.

James Weldon was this day ordered up for

sentence.

His indictment was read, and he was asked
what he had to say, why judgment of death
should not be pronouncra agamst him ?

Mr. If <Aa%.»Mv lords, I shall humbly
submit to your brdships, that the judgment
in this case ought to be arrested.. iSuJi count
in an indictment is ia th« Oftture of a separate

VOL XXVI,

indictment, and therefore each count should
contain all the legal and essential requisites
of an indictment : if any of these essential
requisites be omitted, the* indictment is viti-
ated, and the judgment must be arrested.
Every indictment, and therefore every count
ought to have a formal conclusion ; here the
first count has not such conclusion. It does
not say against the allegiance — against the
peace— or contrary to the statute^ Therefore
the first count is to be thrown out of coasidep-
ation. But the jury having, notwithstand-
ing the direction of the Court, returned a ge-
neral verdict, it became necessary to examine
the second coun^ and that is objectionable
for untertainty in the specification of the
offence. The indictment is founded upon tha
statute, and ought to pursue the words of it-^
The statute says, ^* it a man be adherent to
the king's enemies, and give them aid and
comfort either withm tike realm, oa eUewher^
— The disjunctive particle in this sentence
creates a second offence, perfectly distinct
from the first. One offence is adhering to
the king's enemies u-Uhin the realm: the
other is adhering to them wUhoid the realou
This is somewhat a new case, I have taken
pains to search for precedents of ufidictments
for adhering to the kind's enemies, and have
found but one in the reign of Elizab^h, but
it is so vague and such a riddle as not to hol4
a moment. But referring to the words of the
statute, I wish to know, for which offence
this man is indicted in the second count. The
indictment should state tliat he adhered to
the king's enemies mthin the realm, or that
he adhered to them wUhoutf accovding to the
words of the statute constituting the csirae.
There is a strong reason for this. Suppose
he were acquitted,, he might be indicted for
adhering to the king's enemies without the
realm, and) he could not plead autafoU ac^uit^
because he would be told the indictments
were not tiie same. Therefore this indict-
ment being essentially defective in omitting
the words of the statute, the man is not con-
victed according to law. I take this to be a
rule, that where two things are included
within a sentence, separate in their nature,
a man cannot be inaicied indiscrirainateljv
for both, but the indictment should distinr
ffuish between them. There aught have
been a third count for adhering to toe king's
enemies vnthin the realm or wUhoutf and then
a general verdict would prevent any objicction.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL'-Uy lords, it will
be very unnecessary for me to give you much
trouble. It is said, you should arrest the
judgment for error in both the counts. It is
saia each count should be considered in itself
as a complete indictment. For the substance
of the charge, the rule is so. But where
there are man^r counts, each specifying au
offence, Ihe indictment mav have one general
conclusion, going to the wnole. As here, to
simplify the case, the prisoner is charged with
compassing the dCftth 9f Ihe kiog^ mmI the

U

S91]

S6 GEORGE Itl.

TriiJi ffih» B^imiin^

DWt

iieit count sMelBM a IMW cYiaiM^ Hial off
^hering to tne kbie's enemies. mUi Mug
thu$ speeified, &til tHere beiag ivdftiiort
«ui(ter, fltttting what the pHsoner wis and b»
^fiigo^ then eom^ the geniral conclusion
«f the indictment, apptyioe to 1)oth counts.
If any man of common unwsrstanding, clear
of technical modes of reas6nin^ read this in-
^ictment, he will find so ; and it is according
to the order used since the introduction of the
Enghsh law, the conclusion always going to
efery count contained in the indictment.
:After havinv stated what the designs wem,
\\. says, he is guilty of compassing tne king^s
death, and of adhering to the king's enemies,
und then there is a general coftduslon
^o| confined to one or other count, but
^n^ to both offences in<iluded within the
isame statute. I belike all that which was
so nraeh to the disgrace of the law, in taking
teehnioU objections, has been exploded^ in
a^ari^ofm^tknces; and pravided substan-
tial justice has been done, courts of justice do
not attend io objections of tUs sort, unless
they ^t absolutely bound so to do. If in te
<ommon course of language this conclusion
%an be applied to both enarges, your brdships
'iMH do so,according to the modes now ado])ted
^pon cases of tiiis sort, and it will be sufteient
to refer your lordships to your own under-
atandtng, without ftrtner argament.

As to the second objection, ii u MmttOM
sirvottWit^ of nk^wM^ that the indictment
ishould state whether he adhei%d to the khig's
^eneiiHes, either wittuh the realm or without
An obiection of that sort being made, I ei-
1)ettetf that some precedent would be shown,
«r some authority that would warrant the
'objection, iliis indictment is conformable
to the pmeedents I hive seen, and when your
lordships look into the slaluto, yon will find
4hete can be BO ground for the objection-^
^ within the realm or elsewhere^— 4s notpart
t>f the description of the crime, as set forth
^pon the fhce of the statute. The crime is
'' adherhig to the kmg*s enemies"^tfaat is
what the statute has declaved -^ ^ If any
tnan levjr war, or be adherent to the king's
enemies in the realm, and gives them cony-
fort elsewhere*'— if he adbeie to them, by
giving them ccinfort in the realm or else*
where*— in a word, as if the statato said-^
^ If he giVe ibeto aid, lac them bewbeiethey
may^— .Jet the act done be within the realm
tfi whhout, he Is alike goi)^ of adhering to

the klhg^s enemrto Tdur lordships aeel^tlin
cdntojrt, thHr aro superfiuous wera% beeaufeO
it clearW shows, thkt if ud be gHrM an}
where, the party ^ving it, will be ^lilty.

^Here Mr. Attorney-general was stopped.}

Mr. Justice CAam^lsin.— We will not
trouble vou any fiirther, and it would not be
fiiir to the man, if wa by our conduct insi<«
nuated, thai the objections were Hfcely to
frrevail. We are of opinfon, that the objec*
tionsare not fonndeo; that the conckmon
In sense and according to precedents goes to
both counts. 80 it is in all deckirations;
Therefore there is nothing in the first objee-
tion.— We are also' of opinion, that the ea^
sence of the offence is adherinff to the \atngt
enemies, and rt is hnmaterial wnere they are*
It is an oflenee not constituted by statute,
but an offence at common law, and the sta-*
tute only says, thilt no man sb^ be indicted
but for treason, as there secoified it is not
created by th^ act^-And indeed, if it were
necessary, it does ^libstantiaOy anpear, be-
cause two otert acts state, mt an open and
public war h carried on by Hie French, and
rhat the prisoner was adhering to the pef^
sons exercising the government of France.
80 that if it were necessary, it Is substantiidljr
charged that he was adhering to the qie^ies,
without the realm.

Mr. Justice Hnttcane.— I agree, that the
conclusion goes to both cotints ; and tntfa re-
gatid to the hist count, I think the statute ia
completely complied with in this indictment.
'* Be adherent to the king's enemies within
the realm or elsewhere.**— At the time thi!i
stetute wa^ passed, no treason could be tried,
but treason within the realm, and that is the
treason specified, ^ giaine them aid withm the
redm" — then are added the words, *^ or
without**— How is the charge here ? that the
prisoner at Ufiidy-street in the eity of Dublin
—The locality is anneied to the person ad»
hering, not to the enemy to wliom he adhered.
Thereibre this is a sufficient charge within
the wordb of Hie statute.

Mr. Baron GfOrgt.-^I coneur perfbetty
with the reM of the GouTt

Mr. Baron George then, after a sidlable
and pathetio exordium, ptonoanced flie sen-
tence of the tew, that the prisoner be ^eeuted
on the fd of March, 1790>

WtUim was executed at the fi|)nt of '^e^
gate, pursuant to hit aealencf •

9W]

Mshad Mopdrejbr U^ T^toicm*

A. D. 1795,

[294

613. Proceedings on the Trial of Michael Maguire for High
Treason, before the Court holden under a Commission of
Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on Thursday December
24th : 36 George IIL a. d. 1795.»

Covyn CocsT.

Thsnday^ December 5(4.

Michael MAOUIRE ms indicted for
faish titasoQ in compassiD^ the king's death
•nd adheiinff to his enemies, in support of
which a number of overt acts were stated, the
jprincipa] of which was, that in order to enlist
nomas Roden, a fifer in the lOitii regiment,
to join with, and become a Defender, to aid
and asust the persons exercisine the powers
<»f government in France, he didkeep and de-
tain him from his regiment for the space often
dajs, and did nve nim durine that time, by
way of stipend at the rate of six-pence per

Gr-
ille indictment is not sol forth in this case.

She firosecution having been given up, and

tfaonfore the reporter would not have menti-

ooed it, except lo notice a proceeding whkh

had the appearance of novehy to some; but

being sanctioned by the approbation of three

judges, may serve as'a precedent in cases under

euBilar circumstances.

The prisoner having pleaded not guilty, and

a jury neing sworn, Mr. Prime Serjeant stated

the case on the nart of the crown, and the

witpess was callea.

Thomtu Roden^ swom-^£xami9c4 by Mr«
Attorn^ General

Where were you born ?— In Staffordshire.
What brought you here ?— I enlisted for a

In what regiment?— In the 104th regi-
ment.

What was the nature of your duly in that
tefMnent? — ^A fifor.

Did that regiment come to Ireland? —
Yes, please you, my lord, it came to Belfast.

Dia you come with it? — ^Yes.

How long ago ?~-Three quarters of a year.

Where did it go to ? — From Manchester.

But afUr you came to Belfast, where did
you go to f'-To Dublin.

JjSok at the prisoner ; did you ever see him
before?

* Ti^pen by Wul Rldgeway, esqr. barrister I
at law, I

[The witness hesitated.]

Which is the man ; point out Michael Ma-
guire.^— I neither see Michael Maguire, nor
Murphy.

D« you know Michael Maguire? — ^If {
should see him, t should know him.

Do you see him ?

[The Witness looked about, but made no an-
swer.— ^He was then desired to fook
through all the seats, beginning with the
first row, until his eyes reached th^
dock.— After doing so, he said — ^I do
not see him].

Look again in the same manner?— I dq
not see him.

[The witness was then desired to withdraw^
and the sub-sherififof the county was do-
sired not to suffer any person to sjj^cak
to him.]

Mr. Attorney GeneraL-^^y lords, if I be-
lieved that the witness had thrown his evei^
towards the dock, I should desire to have the
prisoner acquitted immediately. But the
senUemen round me say, he did not throw
nis eyes to the dock. I shaU now desire, a&
has been practised at the Old Bailey, that the
prisoner may be brought forward to the front
seat, and that some persons, as nearly of hil
own condition in appearance as may be should
be placed there along witb him.

This was accordingly done. The g^ntlemea
of the bar retired ^om the front scat— the
prisoner was placed there, and five or six pecr
sons, taken from the crowd of auditors, wefe
placed along with him.

The witness was then brought in, and de^
sired to look at the several persons, sitting in
the first seat, beginning at one and looking on
to the other.

The witness did so, and after looking al
them for some time, he laid his finger apon
the head of a person who was not the pri-
soner.

The witness was ordered off the table, and
the prisoner was acquitted.

MuapHY was then put upon his trial, given
in charge to the jury, and the witness not
being produced, the prisoner was acquitted.

*phe Court adjourned.

295]

36 GEORGE HI.

TriaU of the Defindert—

[996

r

614. Proceedings on the Trial of John Leary for High Treason,
before the Court holden under a Commission of Oyer
and Terminer at Dublin, on Monday December 28th :
36 George III. a. d. 1795.*

, . City Court.

Monday^ December S8/A 17P5.

John leary was arraigned upon the
following indictment, the caption of which
beins the same a^that set forth in the case of
IVeldon, is omitted.

Cauntyof the City C « The Jurors for our lord
tf Dublin to wit, l " the King upon their
'* oath present that an open and public war
^*.0D the twentieth day of August in the
** thirty fifth year of the reign of our sovereign
** lord George the third by the Grace of God
*< of Great Britain France andlreland King de-
« fender of the Faith and so forth and Jong
^•before was and ever since hitherto by land
** and by sea hath been and yet is carried on
" and prosecuted by the persons exercising
*• the powers of government in France against
^' our most serene, illustrious and excellent
^' prince our said lord the now knag and that
'* John I«ary of the city of I>ublin yeoman in
•' the sud county of the city of Dubim a sub-
^« ject of our said lord the king, of hiskingdom
^' of Ireland well knowing the premises but
^* not having the fear of God in his heart; nor
*^ weighing the duty of his allegiance and
^* being moved and seduced by the instigation
f ^ of the devil as a false traitor of our said
*^ lord the now king his supreme true lawful
^ and undoubted lord the cordial love and tnie
** obedience which every true and dutiful sub-
** ject of our said sovereign lord the king to-
** wards him our said lord the king should
** bear wholly withdrawing and contriving
"and with all his strength intending the
'* peace and common tranquillity of this
** kingdom of Ireland to disturb and the go-
*' vcrnment of our said lord the king of this his
** kingdom of Ireland to subvert and our said
^ lordT the king from his royal state title ho-
•* nour power imperial crown and government
" of this his kingdom of Ireland to depose and
f* deprive and our said lord the king to death
** and final destruction to brine he the said
** John Leary on the twentieth day of August
f* in the thirty- fifth year of our said lord the
^ king and on divers other days and tiroes
** as well before as afler that day at Suffolk-
'^ street in the parish of St. Andrew in the
^ city of Dublin and in the county of the said
** city of Dublin aforesaid with force and arms
' falsely wickedly and traitorously did com-

u

^mm

* Taken by W. Ridgeway, Esqr.

^- pass imagine and intend the said lord the
'' king then and there his supreme true and
'' lawful lord of and from the royal state crown
^ title power and government of this his realm
^ of Ireland to depose and wholly deprive uid
^ the said lord tne kins to kill and put to
^ death and that to fulfil and bring to effect
" bis most evil wicked and treasonable imaei*
'^ nations and com passings aforesaid he ue
" said John Leary as sucl^ false traitor as
^ aforesaid aud during the said vf^r betwfeea
<' our said lord the king and the persons so ex-
'^ercising the powers of government in
" France to wit on the said twentieth day of
'* August in the said tbirtyrfi/th year of *the
<* reign aforesaid at Suffolk-street aforesaid in
<' the parish of St Andrew aforesaid and in
'' the county of the said city of Dublin afore*
^* said with force and arms falsely and traitor*
*^ orously did^ joui unite and associate himself
** with divers false traitors to the jurors
^ aforesaid as yet unknown and did then and
f' there with such false traitors to the
'Murors aforesaid unknown enter into and'
''becpme one of' a party and society
** formed and associated under the denomina-
<* tion of pefenders with designs and for ^e
'' purpose of aiding assisting and adhering to
^ .the said persons so exercising the powers of
'' government in France and so waging war as
'^ aforesaid against our said sovereign lord the
''bow king in case thejr should invade or cause
'^ to be invaded this his kingdom of Ireland
'' and afterwards and during the said war
" lietween our said lord the king and the said
" persons so exercising the powers of govern*
'' ment in France and enemies of our said lord
*' the king on the twentieth day of August in
'' the sakl thirtv* fifth year of the reien of our
'' said lord the king and on divers otner days,
'' as well before as after that day with force
'' and arms at Suffolk-street aforesaid in the
" parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the city of
" Dublin aforesaid and county of the said
'* city of Dublin aforesaid he the said John
'' Leary as such false traitor as aforesaid in
<< further prosecution of his treason and.traitor-
" ous purposes aforesaid did with divers other
'' false traitors whose names are to the jurors
<< of our said iQrd the kins, as yet unknown,
*' then and' there meet andassemble to. confer
<' treat and consult for and about the adhering
'* aiding and assisting of the said persons ex-
^ ercising the powers of government in Franco
** as aforesaid and being enemies of our said
** lord the king in case they should invade

«7]

Jfoftji Lmryfbr Higft Tnatan*

A- D. 1795-

t298

" or came to1>e invaded this his icingdom of
** Ireland and afterwards to wit on the twen-
*^ tieth day of August in the thirty fifth year
^ of the reign aforesaid and on divers other
** days as well before as after that day with
^ fonre and arms at Suffolk- street aforesaid in
** the parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the
** city of Dublin aforesaid and county of the
** ci^ of Dublin aforesaid the said JohnLeary
** as such fidse traitor as aforesaid in further
" prosecution of bis treason and traitorous
^ purposes aforesaid did then and there with
** divers other false traitors whose names to
'* the -said jurors are yet unknown wickedly
''aiid traitorously associate and unite
''himself to and with divers other false
^ traitors unknown to the jurors aforesaid
^ and did along with the aaid false trdtors
^ to the jurors unknown enter into and
** become one of a party and society united
"and associated under the denomination
** of Defenden with design and for the end and
** purpose of deposing, subverting and over-
'^ taming the govemmentofthiskingdomas by
** law established and so associated and united
** as aforesud did then and there and on divers
** other days and times as well before as after
** that day with divers other falsetraitors to the
'* jurors aforesaid unknown meet and assem-
" hie to confer consult and deUberate on and
*f about the means and- measures for effect-
** ing^ his aforesaid traitorous and nefarious
** designs and purposes and afterwards to
** wit on the said twentieth day of August
** in the said thirty-fifth year of the reign
** aforesaid and on divers other days and
** times as well before as after that day with
" force and arms at Suffolk-street aforesaid
** in the parish of St Andrew aforesud and
^ county of the city of Dublin the said
f* John Leary as such false traitor as afore-
^ said in further prosecution of his tifeasoh
** and traitorous purposes did then and there
'^ with divers other false traitors whose
** names to* the said jurors are yet unknown
** wickedly and traitorously associate and
^ unite with divers other false traitors to
"* the said jurors as yet unknown and did
** along with said false traitors to the jurors
** aforesaid unknown enter into and become
^ one of a party and society united and asso-
^ dated under the denomination of Defenders
with design and for the end and purpose of
subverting and overturning the Protestant
** relirion m this kingdom as by law es-
'* tabUshed and so associated and united as
** aforesaid did then and there and on divers
** other days and times as well before as
** after that day meet and assemble with divers
** false traitors as yet unknown to confer con-
** suit and deliberate on the means and mea^
^ sures for effecting his afbresud traitorous
** and nefarious designs and purposes and
^afterwards to wit on the said twentieth
** day of August in the said thirt^r-fifth year
*< of the reign aforesaid and on divers other
^ days^at well before at after that day with

'^'fofte and arms at Suflblk-street aforesaid
** in the parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in
•* the city of Dublin aforesaid and comity of
*^ the ci^ of Dublin aforesaid the said John
*' Leary as such fiilse traitor as aforesaid in far-
** ther prosecution of his treason and traitorous
** purposes did then and there with divers
" others false traitors whose names to the said
'' jurors are yet unknown wickedly and traitor-
** ously in order to enlist'and procure a liege
** subject of our said lord the Icing then and
** there being whose name is to the jurors
'* aforesaid as yet unknown to be aiding and
^assisting the persons so exercising the
^ powers of government in Fhmce, ana ene-
'' mies of our said lord the king as afore-
** said in case thev should invaile or cause to
** be invaded this his kingdom of Ireland did
^ then and there traitorously administer a
** certain profession declaration and cate-
** chism to the said person whose name is
** to the jurors aforesaid as yet unknown to
** the purport following that is to say

•< • 1 am concerned— 80 am I.— With who?
M < — With the National Convention (meaning
** * therebythe National Convention of France)
** * —What is your designs ?— On freedom.
" * Where is your designs r— The foundation
'' * of it is nounded in a rock, — ^what is your
M « designs r Cause to gueal all nations. De-

^ ' throne all gs (meaning thereby all

*' * kings), to plant the true religion in the
** * hearts, be just. — ^Where did the cock crow
<' < when the whole world heard him ?— In
<* < France — What is the pass word ?— £11-
" * phismatis."

' ^ And afterwards to wit on the said twen-
** tieth day of August in the said thirty-fifth
** year of the reign aforesaid and on divers
^ other days as well before as after that day
** with force and arms at Suffolk-street in
'< the Parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the
** city of Dublin aforesaid and county of the
** city of Dublin aforesaid the said John
** Leary as such false traitor as aforesaid in
** further prosecution of his treason and trai-
** torous purposes aforesaid did then and there
'< with divers other false traitors whose names
** 10 the said jurors are yet unknown wick-
** edly and traitorously in order to enlist pro*
''cure and corrupt a subject of our said
*' lord the king wtiose name is to the jurors
** aforesaid as yet unknown to be aiding and
'' assisting to the said persons so exercising
^ the powers of government in France ana
** enemies of oui;«aid lord the king as afore-
'* said in case they should invade or cause to
''be invaded this his kingdom of Ireland and
" to bind and engsge himself thereto, did then
" and there traitorously administer to and In-
"struct the said subject of our said lord the
" king whose name to the jurors aforesaid is
" as yet unknown to rehearse and repeat a
" certain profession declaration and catechism
" to the purport following that is to sav

*" 1 iun concerned. — So am I. — ^Witn who ?
« • -rwiUi Uip Ni^tional Convention (meaning

S

m]

K GEOHQE m.

Triab (/the Befii^Sf^

[906

'< < Uweby ib« N«l»oiial Coiw#9tk)o of
'<< IFnwcfOf-t'Wbtf ia your deai^iuf^On

** * fpiKid»tm nr U i^ grpundcd u) » n>ck«-^
*' ' Wh«ft is ypur designs ^--^-Cwim to qiieai
^* * all luOioos. df thBQoe all—p^M (mowpf;
^ ' iJbieseby all kings), to plant tOQ true rel^
<< < eipa in the h^rts. bp jusl.— <Wbere did
^ < uie Cock crow wben tbp whole world
«<)ieard himP-^In Frapce.-p^Wh^ b the
f^ ^ pass word?-— Elipbismaiis/

^ And afterwaids to wit oa tha said twen*
^ ^tli 4Mr of AugMSt io the said tbirty^fifth
^ SF^ajr oTth^ reign a&r^d aqd q» ^v^n-
** Other days m well before as aAer that day
^ wUh force and arn^s ^^L 6uffi)lk-stD9et afore-
** said in the pansh of St Aadrew ^foresaid
^ in the cf ty of Dublin and county of tb(s <jty
^ of OubUo afijre^aid the said John I^eaiy aa
*< SMph false inutor as aforesaid io further pro-
^ seculjipa of bis treason aod traiAerous pui^
** Ppse9 aioressjd did then and there wM
** divers oth/er &l^e traitors whosfs names are
«* to tho ^ JMTors as yet onknowa wickedly
**nnd jMtpiou4y in ord^ to oncourage
^ corrupt procure ai^ enlist the said pi^rson
^ who«e name is to Iho jurprs aforesaid as
^ yet unknoum to become one of a party or
<< society formed fpr the purpose of subverting
« the goveromeot of ^bis kingdom of llreiand
^ as by l»w established did then and there
*< tr^torously encoMrage oprrupt procure and
** ^nUn the a^d neraoa whose name is to the
** jurors ^f<3t9mf as yai upkaow^ to join him-
^ self to »nd become on^ of a party or society
** formed and united tor the purpose of sul>-
«< v««ii« the gov^nunwt of this kins^m of
^ Irebod as by J^vf estf^bUshod and aAcr-
** wards Xo wit on the sai4 twentieth diw of
^ Augpst in tne said thirty-fifth year of'^the
« reim oforesaid aod on divers other d^s as
^ v^ before as after that day with fofca and
** arms pt Suffolk*s(reet aforesaid in the pa-
*' nsltk of St. An4rew aforesaid in the city of
« Dublin aforei^ and in the county of the
** oty of Dublin aforesaid he the said John
^ Leary as such false Uaitor as aforest^ in
*' further prosecution of his treason and trai-
^ toroqs purposes aforejsaid did then aod there
** with divers other faUe Uaitors whose osmes
^ to tho said jurors lu-e yet unknown wick-
** edfy and traitorously in order to enlist and
^ procure said person whose name is to the
<^ jurors aforesaid u yet unknown to be
^ aiding and assisting to the persons ex-
** Cicisiog the powers of government in France
^ and eneipies of our said lord the king as
^aforesaid 91 case they should invade or
*' cau9e to be invaded this his kingdom of
'^ Ireland and then and there traitorously ad*
** inmister and cause to b^ admioi9tera« an
** Holawfixl oath to the said person whose
*^naine is ^ the jurvrs aforesaid as yet

^ Mknpwn to t*he pMrpon following that is

" tos^

H A. 8. of «yr own good will and oen-
^'mt»4f fv^eartobfilnia V9 biam^sty

tt

u
il
u

u
u
u
*t
ti
it
tt
tt
tt
it

tt

it

u
tt

tt
ti
it
tt
tt
tt
tt

f<

ti
tt

king Q^oigis thf third* whiI«t)U«av^det
the sama ^Hrernoi^nWMQrey X swear to
be tiu^ aiding aftd assistant to ^vory
brother bound t^ me b^ this application,
and in every form of ^xwh from its firs4
foundatk>n» January irOQ.-^vAnd in every
amendment hitberto — aod will be obe«
dient to my committees, superiors^ com*
menders, and officers in all lawful proceed-
ings and not otberwute, nor will I ^on^aol
to aov sode\y or any prother of an un-
lawful eharacter» but will observe and
oh^y the laws and regulations of my com<*
mittee tp whooi I belong determined bro«
ther, nor in any violation of the la^fs but
to pn^tmy lif^ and proper\y» and the
lives and properties of my Dnethern--^
And I will ^ubiec); qiyself to my cpounit^
te^meo in all jiawfu} proceeding, and not
otherwis/^9 dm'ing the reign of his nuyesty
king Geo^ the third, whilst I live under
the san^e government— I likewise swear i
will meet when and wh^e my commit*
te« will please, and will spend what is
pleasing to president and company— (will
not quarrel n9r strike any person what*
someyer, knowing hun to bo 8Uph> Wt will
Uve lovit^ and friendly wi|h every one
und^ that dooon^ination— I will not rise
any fignt or (pjaf^ei on account of niy
present iatrtK, or hack that ioirumto my
hrotherhppd*'

* And the said jurors of pur said lord the
4< l^iog upon their oalh further prpsent that an
** open and pubUp war on the said twentieth
^' day of August in th^ thirty*nf^ year of the
^* reign of our aaid lord George the third and
^* fiolorth and lopg before was and ever since
<' and hitl^ertp by land and by sea bath bcjea
f ( gad is carried on and prosecuted by the said
** persons exorcising the powers of goTemmant
** m frapcip against our most serene illustri^
<' ous and excellent prince George the third
** now king of Ireland and sofprth aqd that
** the said Jphn IfiW^ a subject of our said
f' lord the king of hi> kjngdoni of Ireland
" well knowing the p^mises npt having the
^* £ear of God in his heart nor weighing the
** duty of bis all^iaace hM being moved
** and seduced b^ the iosti^tiop of the devil
^' as a false traitor against our most serene
'' and illustrious and excellent prince Geoigs
^' the third now king of Ireland and soforth
<< and contrivipg and ^ith all his strength in-
** teqding the peace of t^U his kingdom of
** Ireland ^ disturb and the gpv^ament of
'* this his kingdom of Ireland to subvert he
^' the said John I^eaxy on tiie twentieth day
<< of August in the thirty-^fth year of tha
^ reign aforesaid and Qn divers other daya
^ and time* aa wall pefore as after that diay
** with force and arma at Sq^'lk-slifet afore*
^ said in the pa^sb of St Andtew aforesaid
'< iq Uie ci^ of Dphlio f^reaaid and county
f of the ^m4 ^^^ of Dublin afp^esaid on-*
"lawf\^ly.>aud traitorously was adhering
** to ai^ng ^nd c^orting ^ said ftersooa

»l}

Jain Ltmjffir Jl/jjk Trtatoti.

A, D. 1795,

[90t

^etefeishig Ihto pcvWM df gciVCMiiitflil in
^ Ftaitice and HMd ^iiig «tieoiie^ «f mf
" said lord the king as aforesaid add ^al in

* the ptoseciitioto (^fbttnahoie anrt «ie«utioD
^ of the said traitorotis adhtnlig bf him the
** said John Learf to the persom ^xeveisioe
<' the {towers of f»veMBenl in France and

* being enemies ot our sidd twil the present
** king and the said persons so enierciftn^ the
** powers of govemittent in France to wit on
** the said twenti«t!i dav <of Angust in the

* siod thirty-fiftt) ^reair of the r^i^ alot«said
*at 6iifiblfc>stfeei aforesaid in the fMrlsh
** aforesaid and in the counW of the tiff of
" DuMfnf irtbfe^aM ^I9k retise acfd attns
^ faAs^ Inalieiocfeljr add tnhoiodsly did jom
** unite and associate himself to and witit
<* di¥efa Adse tiraifeoTs to the jnrot^ as vet iiu-

* known and did Aen and there with sneh
** ikise traitors to the jurors aforesaid as vet

* unknown enter inte and become one of a

* farfy and sodet^ Ibnned and assodated
^ wider the denomination of Defenders witli
'' design and for the pufpose of ttditog as-
** sisting alid odneting to the said penens
** so exeidsing Uia ^mufs d( gpvemtnent
** in France and so imiging war as aforesaid

* will) oiir said s6verei^ lord the king in
'^ease they should hitaae oreause to be in*
•* vaded ihis his kingdom of Ireland"

The in^ctment then set out the same
^ert acts as are contaiaod in the first count

The prisoner pleaded Not OuHty, and the
Aeriffii faaWng teinriied their ))anel^ il was
called over.
Sdt James Bond, bail, ^hillenged {MSpemp*

torily l^ the prisoner,
Huj^ Catncross, esq. challenged peiemploiily

by the prisoner.
Joseph Dickinson* esq. same.
XAmdy Foot^ esq. satne*
Hugh Grd^ersy eaq* swefa,
George Overend, esq. sworn.
Daniel Qeale, merchant, swoHi.
Samuel TynM, taei'chant, sworn.
WHliam Dickinson, Mereban^ dialtenged

peremptorily by the orisoner.
William Oalway, tneinnian^ smne.
WiQiam TvoHKpsoo^ metchant, sam^.
Isaac Maunders, merchant, same.
Sobert4Cihg, teercha»t,iMt by o* the part of
' the'icf^wn. *

Richard Jackson, merchant, sweth.
Xraou nrtMSnfn, Mitt\:>lniAt, ehallet^^ed ^^eieMp*

^wiiy*by xBo *piisoner.
Sftnon TeMdyle, merchant, sMfve.
Itbiw Weir, ttiei If nurt, Banie»
Heniy Chailes Sirr,* eiq. same,
oanmei mnniiefDn, eM|. same.
B^o^amm ^FnoQward, merchant awMpn.
lleaid Nttbitt, merchant, set by on the faft

oif ihe tDiavltt.
John Rutherford, merchant, same.
Oeoi'gd^ilkTttsti^cmg^ teertfcatft, ftW«^

» I, lit I I mi

M*ta«i^

tttetafcfcratoai^nMijettfgdMib

TiMiaa Prenikte, mertihaM, sel Ify on the

part of the crown.
Thomas Wiikhison, mtMbani.
Jonas Pasley, merchant, challenged peitmp»

tarily by thh pHsooer.
Edward Armstrong, merchant, sworn.
Godfrey Pilkw^rth, nefoboBt, set by «n the

part of the crown.
Gebrge Carleton, merchant, chaflcnged pe-

reiaplorily by the pHsoner.
WilliMn Malleck, merchant set by en the

partoftbeorown.
Joiin Fafange, merchant^ irhsflangedpemtap*

torily by the ptisoner.
Wittmm M<Ken«e, aeranm, chalkngai f^

ieffi)norfly by the Misoner.
Archibald iVedeniniek, mMefaaa^ wmrnt
Edwaid Whitehead, memhaif^aot kQp en tim

pHrtoftheerowtt.
Jmnea Atkinsan, meftfaant^ aWoin^
Hugh Cochran, merdiaat, efaatleng^ f$^

lempiotily by ilio prtaoiier.
Frederick Du^ale, merchant, set Iq^Mltlit

part'oftheemwu.
CorneHtJS GwMier, merehmfti

THB JVETi

Hngh CiuAiers.
George Overend.
DanillOeale.
Samdel tVndaU.
Riehatd Jackscm.
David Weir.

Banjamm Woed wanit
Oeor^ Ai'mstrong^
£dward Aim^tfonjg.
Arch. Tredennuft*
James AtamMiH.
GoMntfins Gimtier.

The prisoner waa then ^vcm hi charas le
the jury, and Mr. Attorney General stated the
case .yaeMy much to tlie same effect nt in
Weldon's trial, the reporter therefore dckesnot
think it necessury to insert it, particulaffiy as
anv thing new whiob arose in tftie case, waa
ftitty observed upon in ipesking le the tvi-
denee.

William Lawler was produced^ btU before
he was sworn,

Mr. M^NbUj.^Do you believe in the ei-
ialence of a dod, and rewards and puaial^
ments haieafter ?-^I do.

Itie witness waa then 8worfi.-ȣxainiiied hj
Mr« prime StrgetnU,

Of whal counfrr ale yoof^-^Of IiriJinJ,
rir.

To what psofiessiaii or trade were yon hnd I
•^To Uie Piwttntatt seMgioD.

To what iNiler-^Tlie ^Iding.

Wiieie haww^OB woslocdl— ui irehrtri.

Aiqr whefe mel-^lB BnglaniL

At what that tow yen walked eiseaaN*^^
tl»year ITM.

Whattsme dldynnffetunif^-Twvyemi*

Dwtng yiinr leaiaenne im Mof^KOd, weM
ye« ofagf aocia^K-Ya^ ^

AHir yenr teftiiti t» UdmL did vm
«d.

303]

S6 GEORGE IH.

Trials qf ike Defimden^

[904

Of vhal society ^-I do Djot know tbt nam^ l
of it. I

What becaine of that socie^ ?-~It was dis-
solved.

Did you become a menber of any other? —
I did.

Ofwhat?— The Telegraph aod Philanthro-
pic societies.
• These were twodilFereDt societies ? — Yes.

Do you remember the name of any person
wboswas a mepuber of either, or which of
them?— John Burke belonged to them both.

Do.yod recoiUait what uie general subject
of discussion, or debate was ? — After Burke
Ibuad the first .society was dissolved, and he
was expelled the college^ he.collected ten per-
sons, I was one, and he told us the object of
each, was to get ten, and each of these ten
was to^et five, as thev. would have a num-
ber sufficient to take the castle. One hun-
dred were to get soldiers' clothes, by which
the citizens would think the soldiers bad
joinfidthem. . .

In the course of last summer did yon be-
come a member of any other society ?— -When
we had made up our ten, we were to inform
Burke, and having made up my ten, I did in-
form him, and he got a room m High-street
for the different tens to meet in.

Did they meet? — ^Theydid, and he called
it the Philanthropic society; and any mem-
btef proposed any friend he thought proper,
and he accordingly was elected a member.

Pray, sir, have you ever heard of any
parQr or set of men, known by the name of
Defenders in this country P — I have.

Were you ever admitted a Defender?— I
was^ in Barrack-street.

And by whoni ?— By Weldon.

What Weldon ?--Of the Bhkck horse.

Do you recollect the manner in which
you were admitted? — By an oath adminis-
tered, or declaration ; two papers were read.

Where are they P — I do not know.
' I will show them to you [producing two
jMipers]— look at these papers?~These are
the papers 1 was sworn to by Weldon.

Was any other communication made to
you ',' any sign, or signal?— Weldon showcKi
me the signs, so as to know a Defender.

Show them to the Jury ?— >Weld*n told'US
when we were in company, and wanted to
know ,a Defender the sign was, to put the ^
two hands joined backwaras upon the top of
the head, and to pretend. to yawn, then to
draw! the hands down upon v/our knee, or
upon the table. Then the otner answers by
drawii||g the right hand over the forehead, and
returning it upon the back of the left hand :
The person in answer,-:or reoly to that, draws
the ItfJL hand across the forehead, and returns
it to the back of the .right hand. Upon
ahaktns hands, they pressed the thumb of
the right hand upon the back of the Ijsfi, and
not to .b^ afrtttd to hurt the person, and if
they jMked, what ym the pass- word, JE(»>Ai>-

Did you evfiit see these papers in> the poa^
session of any man of the name of Kennedy ?
—Yes, sir.

And you told Alderman James, thai ha
would find them with Kennedy ?— Yes.

Where ? — At the post-office.

In what part about Kennedy ? — In his foln

Afler you were sworn in Barrack-street, wa»
there any mention of any future meeting f^-
Weldon was asked when there would be any
meeting i he said there would be a meetiug in
Thomas-street, he believed, in the course of
the next week, aad he would inform Brady to
let us know. .

How soon after you were sworn, was there
any meeting, at which ^ou were present ?-*!
do not know. It was of a Sunday.
. Can you form any belief as to the time,
whether a week, or a month ?— It was not long
after.

Where was that meeting? — In Plunket-^
street ; it was Bradv and Kennedy brought
me there. I was walking on a Sunday, and
they brought me there.

Do you Icnow John Leary ? — ^Yes,. sir.

Point him out to the Court and the Jury ?—
There he is in the dock.
. Be so good as to tell the Court and the
Jury, who were at the meeUne in Plunket^*
street, as you know ? — Brady and Kennedy- •«

Who else ?— I cannot say exactly.

Can you say, was Leary there ? — I think
the first place I saw him was at Stoneybatter:

Then am I to understand you to say, whe-
ther he waa at PluqketHstreet, or not?-*He
might be there for aught I know.

And you* do- not know he was atPlunket-;
street ?— I do not.

How long after the meeting at Plonket-
street wasthe meeting at Stonejrbatter? — I
cannot say.

I do not mean that you should tell exactly
— It was after the meeting, at Plunket-street.
Yes, sir.

You saw Leary there ? — Yea.

You are positive you saw him there ? — I did*.

How came you to go there ?*-^Walsh, a tai-
lor, told me of it.

And you went with him there ?— Yes.

In what character did you go there? — Aa
going to Defenders.

y/ta any person sworn at that meeting?—
Hart brought in a young man, and another^
alone with him*

Waa there any oath administered, or. airf,
book produced ? — Hart had abookin his hand.'
The young man seemed unwillins at first.
Hart said, the dbject was^to assist the French,
when they would come.

Did you hear him make that dedaiation ? —
I did, and all present, or else they must be
deaf. '

Was Leary present, I ask youi^n?-— He«

Was there. anv oljection made to what
Hart said by any body ?— -No, sir.
Afte(.tbe man waa aworo, did Hut do mtj

303]

John Lcaryjbr High Treason,

A. D. 1795-

[soe

thing the ? — He had Msnt some to get arma
that night, pistols, and swords : — be desired
them to brmg what they had, as they in-
tended to go out that night; that they knew
a young man at one of the ky>u8es where they
intend^ to go. Leary seemed to be a little
in liquor at the time.

After the youns man was awom did any
thing else happen T-*Hart gave the signs and
the pass*wora, Eliphwnaii$,

Did he give the same sign that Weldon
gave you ? — He did.

Dia you hear the purport of the oath ad-
ministered by Hart ? — No.

After swearing, was there anv proposal
made by Hart ?-— He desired such of the young
men as were present, who had not arms, to go
and get arms.

Cmtrt. — Had any one arms there ? — I had a
sword and pistol.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — Was there any other
person with arms? — I did not see any.

Did Hart exercise any authority, or do any
other act? — He was a Committee* man, and
in consequence of the persons not returning,
he desired every persoo present to come to the
table, and lay their right hands upon it, and
OD their oath to come the next night with arms*

Did the company obey ?— -Every one that
was present.

Was Leary present ? — I cannot say, he was
present just at that time.

You say, he was present at the time the
oath was administerea ?— He was.

And at the time the declaration was made
by Hart of the mptives ?— Yes.

AAer that conversation, were any arms
taken? — ^Not as I know of. I saw Murphy
since, he told me arms were taken.

Had you any conversation with Leary ?— «I
had, at his own place.

Wheo was that ? — ^In the course of the week
after.

What did he tell ^ou of the proceedings of
that night? — He said they went to one house,
where there was a great noise, and a ringing
of a bell — that they had a stone to throw the
pennel in ; he had a blunderbuss in his hand,
and had gone round to the corner of the house
to see the person ringine the bell ; he could
not see the bell, and believed it was in the
chimney — not seeing it, he came back and
struck the pannel with the buttrend of the
blunderbuss, and broke in the pannel, and
also broke the stock of the blunderbuss.

Court. — ^Where was this house? — At one
side of Bl^k horse-lane.

Courts — Was it the same night ?^I cannot
say.

Omrt. — What night did you understand it
was ? — I understock from Leary it was the
same night that I had left tliem, that they
had gone out.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — What more did he say
was done afterwards? — He said, he ran up
stairs, saw the person ringing the bell, and
tripped the legs from under him.

VOLt XXVL

I fofeet whether you said he gave any ae«
count of what became of the blunderbuss ?—
He said, that after tripping the legs from under
the man, they took away the arms that were
in the bouse.

But what became of the blunderbuss he
had ? — I understood firom him, that he had
left it with a person to be' mended.

Did you see Hart afterwards ? — I did.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — Had you any conver-^
sation with Hart as to what passed ?

Ccmrt, — ^Was Leary present ?

PFtfnesf.— No.

Court, — ^Theo this is not evidence.

Mr. Prime Serjeant. — ^My lords, I do not
wish to press it. But here was a direction
given by Hart, and I want to show how it was
followed up.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain*--! tlnnk it is not
evidence, unless L^uy was present

Mr. Prime Serjeant.--Do you know what
became of the afros which were taken that
night?— Leary told m^ afterwards, when wef
were walking up Blackhorse-lane, and we
came to a house, that it belonged to a Com-
mittee-man, and that the arms were lodged
in a hay-stack bek)nging to that man.

CouH, — Do you recollect the day?— I do
not, it was either of a Monday or Tuesday.

Was it the Monday, or Tuesday after the
meeting ?— No. He had a pair of women's
shoes, which he had mending, and wa9 going
home with them; we went up Blackhorse-
iane, and we turned ittto a house. There were
some men sitting down in a place where
they had drawn home some hay. Leary spoke
to one of them, who he told me afterwards
belonged to the place. He pointed out to me
the place where the hay had been, under
which the arms had been put. But the hay
was not then in the place at that time we saw
it. He said the man told him a person came
to take away the arms as the hay was to be
removed.

Court,— You say there was no hay upon the
place where the arms had been ? — ^There was
not. Botii the hay and the arms were re«
moved, for I could not see any.

Do you say the prisoner told you the arms
had been removed i — He said, the man who
owned the place told him, that he gave notice
to the people to remove the arms, as he was
to take away the hay.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — You said the owner
of the hay was a Committee-man ? — So Leary
told me.

Describe the situation of the house ?— The
house was on the right hand of the lane, bt(t
we went in at a gate, and when we entered
the ^ate, the house was on the left side.

Did Leary tell you with whom he left the
blunderbuss?— I do not recollect.

Did he tell you the place ?— No.

Were you at any meeting, after ^he meet-
ing at Stoneybatter ? — I was, at Nbwlan's m
Drury-laoe.

Were you at any other?— I was at Tooio's,

X

307]

36 GEORGE III.

Triab ofiheD^/hukrt'^

[SOS

the upper end of Cork-street, where I was
taken.

' Did you know there was to be a meeting
there?—! did.

Did you suppose it to be a meeting of De-
fenders P'-'II was : after the army had been
aftev some of them, I saw Murphy, who had
been taken up, and was afterwards lei out.

But did you ever tell any person, that there
wookl be a meeting at Toole's in Cork-street?
—I did.

Whom ? — Mr. Cowen and alderman James.

You told of this meeting? — I told them of
it before. It was afier I gave mv information
that these persons went to Toole's. I knew
they were to meet there to be out of the way
--Dry and others were to nees — but I had
given informations of them before, and it was
settled, that I should be there.

/You talked of a meeting at Nowlan*s ? —
YiBS : in Drury-lane.

Who was at that meeting ?— Coffey was in
the chair; Dry, Turner, Cooke, Hart, Lewis,
Kennedy, and Flood.

You have seen all these people at different
meetings of Defenders before?— rl had not
seen Lewis— Leary was not there.

' Do you recollect any particulax conversation
with Hart there ?

Mr. Af«JVa%.— My lords, I object to this
evidence. The witness has sworn, that Leary
was not present, and tberefoe no conversa-
tion can be evidence.

Mr. Prime Setjeunt, — I have the authority
of this Court for this evidence upon the for-
mer trial.

Mr. Baron George.— That came out upon
the cross-examination.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — When did you dis-
cover all you have told, and why and to
whom ?— I told it to Mr. Cowen in Grafcon-
street.

Why did you tell it?-^In con80qQence of
what Hart told me.

What was that?

Mr. M*Nalii/,—l object to that question.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — ^This is not to affect
the prisoner. Surely, the witness may tell
what was his motive.

Court, — The private conversation between
him and Hart was objected to upon the former
Irial, and refused to be admitted upon the di-
rect examination. It afterwards came out
upon the cross-examination. Any motive or
avowal by Hart in the absence of Leary is not
evidence.

• Mr. Prime Serjeant. -^Vf hen was the meet-
ing at Toole's?— On the Saturday after.

Was there any general proposal of any kind
made at Nowlan's ?

Mr. M'NaUy.—l object to that.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain,-^^ e are of opi-
nion, that all acts done at general meetings
are evidence ; but the private declarations of
an individual, not communicated to the body,
or at all adopted by it, are not evidence.

Mr. Prime &r;eaR^— Was there any gene-

ral proposal made ta the meeting ?^Coffey
wanlea to know, what number of DefisBders
were in DubHo, that they might have offieere.

Was there any money collected ?— None,
but two-pcBce a piece for the beer that was
drank.

Was there any proposal, or demand fot*
money at Pluokei-stMet?-^! was asked for
six-pence«

For what purpose ? — ^To buy powder.

Was there any money given? — I said I had
none. Kennedy gave me a shilling ; 1 laid
it down and took up sixrpence and gave it to
Kennedy.

What brought you to PkmkeV^treetf —
Brady and Kennedy brought me there. They
said they were all Defenders.

Cour/.— Was there any signal made iMe of ^
— No, there was not.

William Lawler cross-examined by 1^.

M'Nalfj/,

You have sworn, that you beKeve in God.
Have you made any declaration to the con-
trary P — ^Never. I was at a meeting with
Galland, John Burke,- and Le Blanc, who
would wish to persuade me, that there was no
Saviour. But I never heaid any one say, or-
deny, that there was a God.

And you always, I presume, have held »
contrary doctrine?

Court —He is not iMNind to answer that,
question.

Mr. M*Nalfy,-^lR the case of the King v.
Taylor, Peake's N. P. 11, a witness was asked
as to his belief in Jesus Christ, tliat was not
thought a proper question. But to ask him
as to his belief of a God is a legal question.*

You said you were taught to believe in the
Protestant religion, and that there was a Sa-
viour?— I was.

Have 3rou always, and do you yet adhete to
those opinions? — ^These men, whom I men-
tioned before, had with their doctrine almost
persuaded me, that there was no Saviour^ but
I saw since throueh it.

You mentbned the names of Chilland and
John Burke ; why did you not mention the
Christian name of Galland I As you are a
Christian, do you not know the Christian name
of Galland? — I do not know.

Are there not two persons of that name? —
There are; the man I speak of was an en-
graver.

You have seen through all their false doe-
trine. How long have you been converted ? —
Siuce that time ; three quarters of a year.

Was it since you gave information to alder-
man James,* or before ?--Il was before.

You were a Christian before you went to al-
derman James? — Yes.

Is that the trulh*?— It is. *

You were bred a carver and gilder? — ^Iwas.-

- - *- ■

* See Philtipp's Law of Evidence, p|>. 18,
19, 30, 3rd edit. And Peake*s Law of Evi-
dence, 155, et seq : 4lh edit.

^ High TViMJdft.

905] John

T6 whdm ^k) you s«^nre yoor dine ? — ^I was
bobod to Mr. Robinflcm io CoUege-green.

DMs he now live io Cape)- street? — ^I have
seen the nadne over a shop there, but I do
DOtknow wllelhcr be is the nun, or owner of
tfaeehop.

Do you not believe, that the Jack Robinton,
who formerly Tived hi Coiiege-greeB, and the
Jack Robinson in Capel-street is the same
fRerAm?-^ believe so.

Have you never seen him in CapeUstmM?-^
i abighty or not in that shop.

Do yoQ not know, as a ipder, every man of
eminence in that line keeping a shop ?— I do
not i«e6llect eveir seeing at that plsce, the
twme of Robinson np^ only that time.

Do you believe there are two Cowens car^
rying on the same buneessin Dablin f--There
iffe; hidiielf and his son.

They live in one house f — k% 1 hear.

If tliere lArere axtotheilr^ should you not hear
of itf^^I belies ta

And by the same role shoald yon not know,
if there were two of the name of Robinson ? —
i have heard he is the same person.

How long did you live with him ? — About
three yfeafa.

How long were you bound to serve him P—
Sevmi 3rtMfs.

The^ you served only tbreeout of seven ? —
ThatisalL

You were a cdnfiflenthd servant to hib ?—
I was an apprentice to him.

He had always a good opinion of you as an
hcmest and fair youn^; man^ — I cannot say
that he had at one time, or he would not
have done wfiat hie did.

What was thatP— -He gaveirteagood horse-
whipping.

He ne^er made ittiy diatge ^on your inte-
grity ?— He did.

WhtttH^a the cham ^— Inhere were women
who used to work at %e giMing bus'mess over
the front shop, and the men at Carving in the
room oV«» tnat up stairs. Thtene wefre some
omaH firames mitmng. Mr. Twlgg and one
Ryan wet6 called up to the g^in^-room, and
had flomet:otaveir6atton'; Mrs. Robtn»cm called
me to go to the master for a shilKng, ahd I
bdd«MUHNS, tiMtl idlenrardB Twrgg inibrmed
him, I was listenine. I said I was not; th^y
bre^ht me up aM €baf|ed toe with taking
those things. I denied n. Mr. Robinscm
brmig^t up a tattan tHfth % ferrule upon it, knd
he laid on me. In the efretiing Mrs. Robinsoft
brbugm me sotne supptt*. I could not take it
M the time and got my ilAlfg^ and went away ;
I went to a woman, who had Inirsed me, and
the peoole in the hotK» hot bearing tiie, t slept
in fm littlMMMise all nig|ht^ and when the
Men wtot out m the mofnmg, i told ttie wo-
man what happened b^Clt^n tneand Jack
Riobinsett.

Was that the duly ehilf>ge tfgainA you?-^
Thtft ^an idl.

Do you forget the punch-ladloi Mr. La^kr ?
—No,

A. D. 1795.

[31

Were ^ou never charged with stealing ^
punch-ladle fro m Cham pion ? — Never,

Wiere ^on never charged with elfealing a
punch-ladle, which your mistress sent by you
to a silversmith ? — ^No.

You aiu an esoeBent workman ?»-I cannot
say.

What made vou leave BobittBon?-^Ine«n-
sequence of that leathering.

How soon after you led Mr. Robinson, did
you go to England?— -After serving the iCf
mainder of my time to WilliareAm ih Grafton-
street I went to Gallagher, he havuig spciken
to ine before I Was out of my time.

Courf.— bid Robinson assign your indent
tureS?— I was informed he Tan away.

Mr. jif*2Va//y.— You went to England ?— I
did.

And were a member of the Corresponding
S<>ctety ?— Yes.

Did you honour that society with the name
oflAwler?— -No.

W hat then ?— With the name of Wright.

What Christiim name?— William Wngbt.

What was yonr motive for changing your
name ?— I had listed in the S9th reghnent of
foot;

How long did you remain with that regb
meivt f— A&mt B month.

You w^ an attested soldier ?— I waa.

By virtue of your integrity, Mr. Wright
Lawler, when you deserted, did you not break
the oath you had taken ?— I do not know what
oath I took; but I took one. '

After you had deserted, yon went into the
Corresponding Society by tne name of Wrigbtt

Where did it usually meet?— One division
met in Bishopsgate- street.

Was that the division you belonged to?-
Yes.

Did Ibey mcfet hi the day, or in the night ?
—In the evening.

Ib not Bishopkgate'^Btreet one of the most
public streets in London ?— It is a wide street

And k great thoroughfare ?— -There are a
great maily pass there ; out Cheapside is ihore
publfo.

After you deserted, you went to London to
conceal yourself ?— I did five thei-e.

You went there publicly?— I cannot Say
pubtkly, because there was not one in a hun-r
dred who knew me.

Did yott walk the streets publicly, otr go in
aoedan-chair to the society ?—>No, nor in a
hackney-coach.

You have led a remarkable life, since you
came to Dublin ?— An honest life ; I never
bfceseiM any yuan.

How long is it since you were wounded ?—
Tht Philanthropic Society, Burke, Le Blanc^
Flood, and several more were together: a
man belonging to Ringsend, I can't think of
his naoiie, was in custody in a watch-house,
and they agreed on a meeting to go there and
take him out, which we did, and one Thomp-
son, who haii a banger, cut me when I went in.

dll] 36 GEORGE III.

Courtr^'Wta he a man of the watdi f •— No :
•^-one oif Ihc societj.

Mr. M^Nalfy, — Who instituted that so-
ciety?—I acquainted Burke I had made up
my ten.

Wereyou not the root from which it sprung ?
— ^I made up my ten.

Who made the proposal fi>r the rescue?— I
did.

Were you armed as well as the rest P^-I

Trials qfih$ Defindtn^

[Sit

With what ?— Pistols,

How numy ? — Four.

How many ball cartridges had you at that
time ?— Not one.

Were there anv shots fired that night? —
There was a pistolfired.

Who fired UP

WHnvtt, — ^Am I to answer*

Court, — You ai% not bound to criminate
yourself.

Mr. Af '^Ta/fy.— Do you know who fired the
pistol?— I do.

Do YOU choose to answer ?— ^If your lord-
ships think I am bound to criminate myself, I
will answer.

Cottrf .— Youare not bound to answer to
criminate Yourself.

Mr. Jl' Aa%.-^Was the prisoner taken out
of the police* house that night?— I did not
see him that night, but I heud he was taken
out.

When yx>u heard the shot, you scampered
ofi"? — I did not scamper off.

Why did you leave the place ?— Because I
was cut in the hand.

Who generally acted as president of the
Philanthropic and Telegraphic Societies?—
Sometimes one and sometimes another.

Did you know a man of the name of Lawler
there?— I believe I did.

Who was treasurer ?— I was to one division.

On your oath was not the Philanthropic
Society instituted originally for the purpose of
reading, and were there not subscriptions for
the purpose of buying a library? — It was to
^t as a Philanthropic Society, that was the
name they put on it, as lovers of mankind.

Were they to murder one part of their fel-
k)w subjecto f — Thcgr were all ready to do what
the Telegraphic would do.

Ws» not the Philanthropic Society^(}issolved
in consequence of a sangumary proposiJ made
Iqr a person ?— The Philanthropies were to
meet at Nowlan's oq the 93rd or August, tlie
same day the Defenders were to meet in
Cork-street.

You were a member of both societies-*
which were you to meet that day ?— I went
to Dry.

You went to the Defenders ?— After I went
there. Dry, Coffey and Kennedy went with
me, to Nowlan's.

Did you not leave the Philaathropic so*
ciety because jth^ would not doan injury ?-r-
N».

Wjis not that society instituted for jtbe pur-

pose of improvement?— Burke and Le Blanc
proposed reading, writing, and learning
French, which ever they chose, and they
subscribed to buy paper— But it was a cloak,
for if any one came in, they could do nothing
to them, as they were only learning to read
and write.

Coari.— They were to learn French?— They
were.

Was it through Le Blanc ?— He was to have .
tauehtit.

Mr. Af'^o/fy.— You were treasurer to this
society?— Yes: to the Philanthropies; one
part of it

Were you ever examined as a witness in a
court of justice before the trial of Weldon ?
—No.

Never in England ?— No, sir.

Was there ever a charge exhibited against
you in England ?— No.

Do you remember the transaction of the
Dog and Duck P— There is not a man in Eng*
land, who would not give me a good character
as to that.

Were you ever charged with stealing a
watch ?— Never.

With stealing any thing ?-~Bat by Ro«
binson.

Did Gallagher throw out any imputation
as to integrity?— I do not recoUect that he
did.

Did you never hear, that he made any
charge upon you ?— >Not to my knowledge.

Did neither he, nor his wife ? — ^They did
not : afler I lefl him, he gave me a great
quantity of good), and Mrs. Gallagher sud it
was better to keep a trotting-horse than a
gilder, he used so much coab and candles.

Was there any charge of cruelty exhibited
against you in that faimly ?— I never did any
act of cruelty.

Was there no charge made aeainst you?—
No. If I did, 1 do not think he would give
me a stroke w work.

Were you never charged with putting out
an old woman's ^e?— There was a small
bottle of eye water, and it was said there was
spirit ofturpentine put into it. I was inno-
cent of the charee.

You have said the prisoner was not present
at Plunket-street?— I did.

What part of Stoneybatter, was the meet-
ins in ? — ^The comer of Arbour-)iill.

Is it not at this side of the may-pole ?— I do
not know where the pole is.

There was an oath proposed to a person un-
known, did you never see him after ?— Never
tu my knowledge.

Did you before?— Never.

Did you ever innuire his name ?— No.

Had you seen Leary that evening before ?
—Not to my knowledge.

Did you see him that eveiking aAer ?— In
the course of the weekai^er.

But after the meeting broke up did you Sep
him ? — ^No.

He was a Tittle in liquor f — Yes.

SIS]

Jok» txan/for Hif^ Treaion.

A. D. i7as.

[314

Ton were dear the door ; how near was be
to you? — I do not know whether he was in
the nMMn at the time the oalii was pot.

And ybu tk> not know whether he heard
the oath put ?— No.

Nor whether be saw the signs you men-
tioned. Will you swear he was in the room
at the moment the oath was taken ?— No.

You did not bear the oath ? — No.

How came it that you heard what Hartsaid^
and did not hear the oath ?— There were two
windows in the room, and some got into the
windows to prevent people from looking in^
and some got round him and the stranger.

You were armed ?— Yes.

Where did you carry your arms ?— My sword
was under my coat, and pistob were in my
pocket. I was desired to bring them there.

They were concealed ?— They were.

Did you take them out P— I opened my coat
lo show them.

Did every one in the room see the arms P—
Hart did, and several saw the arms, because I
opened my coat and showed them.

Wat there any person armed but you?-^
They said they were not.

You believe what they said ?— I do.

There was a man there armed with a fiddle ?
— There was a fiddle playing in the house; I
think it was up stairs.

Not in the room where you were P— No.

Where was the house broke open that you
spoke of? — On one side of Blackhorse-lane.

Was that matter ever made public? — Not
as I saw.

No reward by the owner of it?— Not as I
saw.

Did you ever make any inquiry about it,
or the name of the person whose house it
was? — ^No I did not inquire. The day Leaiy
and I were out, he showed me a house at the
right band, where they had been. There was
a gate opposite to us, and they went over that
gate to the house.

You did not mention a word of this upon
your direct examination ?-4^!vra8 not asked as
to that.

You were sworn to tail iJhe n>hole truth ?— I
told nothing else.

When you appeai^eA'itpon the former trial,
did you s^y.a mm about this house ? Did you,
or did you.n(H?— 1 did not, but I know it.

Did fiAi say any thing upon the last trial,
any thmg of what you have stated, when you
mentioned that Burke was expelled from the
college ?— I said, I belonged to the society.

But did you say any thing as to Burke's
proceedings?— No, I was not asked.

Do you recollect any thing upon the last
trial, respecdng bis sacred majesty ?

Witnen, — How, as to Weldon ?

No— ^t respecting the king ?— I do : Wel-
don told me when I took the test, that if the
king's head was off to-morrow, there was an
.lend of our allegiance.

Did you not say, there vras a time you
Ihougbtiittleofkilhng the king P-^-At theUme
Ihroatb was put.

How often have you tendend the oath
yourself?.

irifii€Sf. -.What oath?

Have you not been in the habit of admi-
nistering oaths ? — At the times the philan-
thiopic met in High-stieek, there was some
little boys carrying about the books. I swore
them not to divulge the secrets of the society,
nor withdraw themselves from it.

Were they members of it ?— They were.

Did you ever administer an oath, not to

five evidence against any of the society ? —
lurk swore the ten, but I do not remember
what the oath was.

Couf^.*^Did you swear those little boys ? —
I did.

Mr. M^Nally — Do you recollect swearing
one of these boys with a pistol to his breast?

[The witness did not answer.]

Have you sworn against any of these littla
boys ?— I do not recollect that I did.

will you swear you did not?-*! cannot
swear that.

You can swear the facts without an tntcti*
tion of remembering what you swear to.

[Witness did not answer this question.] '

But you do not remember, whether yon
have sworn agpunst these little boys or not?
— I cannot.

I ask you this, have you not sworn a great
deal, that you do not remember? — ^I swore a
great deal at the Philanthropic society.

Cottrf .— Do ^u mean what you swora
here, or your mformation before the masis*
trate ? — No ; but what i swore at the phi&ui*
thropic societv.

Mr. M^Nalfy — ^Have you not sworn a great
deal before the magistrate in your informa-
tion, that you do not remember this day ?— I
do not think I ever swore Brady, or Kennedy,
or Flood, or Cofie^ to that.

You gave informations before a magis*
trate?— I did.

You swore to them : Now, do you remem*
her, as you «t upon the table, every thing
you have sworn in those inibrmatmns against
Leary?--No.

Or what you have sworn against any of
them ? — Yes, I do recollect.

Do you remember the name of every per-
son you swore against?*— I do.

Now mention the names of the little boys
to whom you adminbtered oaths?— ^I cannot.

Recollect the names of the little boys you
swore?— There is one lives in Castle-street ;
there was a good many, and I did not know
their names at that time.

Did you everswear a Philanthropic, a Tele*
graphic, or a Defender, never to me evidence
agamst any member ?^ At the Telegmphic so-
aety, Burke and a great many more were
present ; one of the men wanted to swear
the members present, and went down and
brouebt up a book -. two or three were sworn,
and ne desired me to take up the book and

SIS]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial* qftke De/aukrt^

swev» but ms I iHldit iniBy liand, they de-
sired me to stop, for they would not adnit
the oath to go round.

Do you recollect the tiial of JtckiofB* in
Ihtscounli^? — ^Ido.

You recollect 4 |«nfdiliiJt wittien tf iht
name of Cockayne t apon that trial ?-^I do.
. I ask ycAi on yoinr t*^ do ynu know of
any design teainsC the fife of Coekayaer —
There was £b Blahc, the Fnemchman, the
nidit before Jacknon^s ^^r^eecHtkyn, and k man
who lived in CapeUsti^^ly 1)elottgmg to the
Piulanthroplc^ knocked u|^ i&giiitist my win*
dow. My wife got up, and askM, livAo was
«h%ref They desired me to put on my
clothes, and if I had any weapons, to brifi^
tfaem 'Oift. lUdik). They told me we should
sttop Cockayne ftom appearing apdnst Jack^
son. We went to a house at Stepnen's-green,
in the way leading to Leeson-street, n^here he
•4id Mrs* Jackson lived^-he desired us to
wait till he came back. He went in, and
trheahe i^^umed^mdv^Cackayne had been
there, but was gone. He then went Ibr Wal<>
leri and |»nmgbt him. Wis were walking up
ai^d do^n the alieet better than two bonrs^
wiUtins for Cockayne.

V9VH. — ^What was tlic name of the other
man ?— I do not reediect ; he lived in Oaipel-
streeL We get n glass of punofai before wi
went to the green.

Who went i*lo the jionse f—Le Bhmc. We
went afterwkrds to Henk-y-strect, to a hduse
which Le fihtne |iointed out, where he said
Cockayne iodsed up stairs, and saSd he would
get tn over a Sttl^ ^gkto case t he desired us
to walk ut> and down the street, till he Went
for Waller. He and Waller returned. After
he walked biiekward and fbrwani for some
time^ end se^g no light up stahrs, be tho^ht
Cockaylie had not come there. We were M
two faoursnnd ahktfl Le Btehe Mad, if he
could see him, he Would take him oM of the
wur* to prevent hiB«4)peari»^ ButifheWas
killed, and the Court should kncrw it, the ia^
formations lie had dven cotfld be rend{ but
if we kept him^ abd he did not appear, Jacfc^
•OB would be acqttttedw

You were present, and were one ^f that
part^ winch went first for <he pui^pose of as-
sassmating the ntaa. and eiflerwards deter-
mined it woald be vetter to keep him eon-
fined?— I do nol toy We trent for that pur-
pose.

You Were ode of the party f-^Tbere were
four of us.

M^tidti their names ?•— The tnan who
lives ui Capd^uieet, the left hand side, he Is
a coach maker, (Le Blaifc) atod Widter, who
w6rks«t Jaokson^ feandery im Chureh • street,
and myself.

Mr« Prime Sb7eafW.--Wheveaboiits in

kUt l|-fiTU

f f» II

'M u imtT

■ uuhii ^ai I

• SeeS^ ahrd, Vt»l «5, p. f83.

t See His'evideaee on the trial of Jaokseov
awt^ Vol, 46, p. 819> and bis evidence on the
t^iid of W^lhahi Stone^ aAiey Vol. t6. p. idse.

[316

Caf^l-street does this man live f— He lodged
in Capel«etreet With his mother, on the left
side, m ajgate^way.

What IS his motlier's namef — I do not
know.

What part of €apel-«treet is it in ? is it be-
tween Essex-bridge, and MaryVabb^y, or
near whe^ the lottery is dcawn l^-d canfnot
say.

Vol] know where the lottery is drawn P —
Yes ; it is this side of the lottery.

Where did Le Blanc live?— In Golden-
lane.

He was an eiabroiderer ?— Yes.

Court, — You mentioned that at the meet-
ing in Stoneyfoatter, Hart said aloud, the
object was to get arms to assist the French?—^
Yes.

Was Leary present at that time^ or not ?«-
I cannot say.

One of the Jury, — ^You say, thsit Hart de^-
sired vuch aft had not anhs, to go home and
^et armai Therefore I conceive, you were the
only person «mied,and the others went home
for the (Airpose of gettina arms?— I was the
only person armed, Uiat I anow of. Haft de^
sired them to go for a^ms, and not ifnding
them return, he desired those who remained^
to put then: naods upon the table.

How many remained ?—> About fottiteen.

How mamy went away ?-*At the time the
young-man was sworn, there were twenty in
the room.

Then there were but six who Went for
arms ? — ^When Hart desired those who re^
inaln^ to Iky their hands on the table, I
beckoned to Walsh, and he came out, but satc^
he had a naggln of punch te pay for. I went
home and was afterwards informed that they
were out*

Was the prisoner at StoHeybatter that
iiiaht N-Ile tHtt there.

Was hh present at the time, the oath
was sworn upon the table? — ^Not that I
nfCHW ofl

W«s the prisoner ever swora as a Defender ?
-—Not as I know of, but whenever we Vnet til
the shreels, he used to faiake signs, and shake
hands as Defenders do.

But you ncfve^ beam hfan sworn ?— Never.

Mr. Jf<^kMKy^--My lords, I omitted to e»«-
mine the witness as to the papers : npto the
formdr triri, faAi e^denoe went to show they
were fomnd upon Kennedy, but nolhiiftg
SMrO*

CMHf.-^-Claamihe him.

Mr.Af^JV(iil/v.— Bow ofVen have you seen
these papers before ? — ^Very bften.

Can you ttfke upon ycm to swear who wrote
these papersf^To the faesi of my belief It
was Hamon.

Did ybu ever see Hanlbn write ?---}^o.

Can you sWear whose wnfinng thejt kre fh>m
having seen any peiMn write ?-^^.

Is there any private Mark upon Ihesb
papers r---I would kMOw them nty where.

Is that an answer ?-r'I d^eribed Ihtein to

317]

John tJeatyfir l^gk Treaton.

A. D. 1795.

[S18

Aklcnnao James, on account of their being
much tumbled.

I ask you, have you any private mark upon
these papefB ? — ^No.

Have you ever seen them in the posseBsion
of aoy other h—lu the hands of Coney.

Oia any one else see them f-^Oeoige
Lewis.

Will you swear Ihis is the identical pa|>er,
which was in the hands of Weldon. which
you saw in the hands of Kennedy, ana in the
hands of Coffey ? — ^The very paper.

From what mark can ydu say that, and
that it is not a paper wrote by the same per^
son f — I took particular notice, at the time
Weldon swore me of the hand the papers
were wrote in, and that they were damaged.

If the same man who wrote these papers,
wrote duplicates, and that they were dam aged,
would you swear to them f — I believe those
are the papers.

Mr. AHamey General, — Upon what ocea^
sion ^d you see the papers in the hands
of Cof^ I — Sunday 83ra of August, when we
were at Dr^*'s in Cork-street, Coffey swore
George Lewis upon them, and Kennedy put
them in his breeches fob.

Alderman Jama sworn. — Bx^mined by Mr.

Saurin.

Do you recollect having received informa-
tion of any papers being in the custody- of any
person f — I do.

From what person ?— From the witness who
is just eone on the table.

Of vmat papers f— He told me of the De-
fenders oath } that I would^find it

Mr. WlfA/Zy.— My lords, I object to this.
If the magistmte took down the information,
the writing should be produced

WiifM»i.»-'l had written a memorandum of
it, but do not know what I did with it. I

fave a cop^ of it to Mr. Carleton, and gave
im directions to search Kennedy's fob for a
particular paper.

Mr. Sourifh— On what day were tliose in-
formations given ?— I believe on the 87th or
Sgth of August last.

Did you ever issue a warrant to apprehend
Lawler himself ? — No.

Do you know any thing of his being appre-
hended?— ^He came on Saturdi&y, S9th of
August, for I was particular in tsJcing a me-
roofandum of that, and gave me information
of several Defenders.

Do you know the circumstances of Lawler's
beine apprehended ?--I (lo.

What were they? — He cam^ to me on
Saturday evening and asked my advice or
opinion

Caiiri.— This private conversation is not
evidence.

Mr. SoiieUor General, — My lords; where
it is neeessary to show that the witness came
in voluntarily—-^

CoMrf . — That appears already from the testi-
mony of the witness htmself.

Where was it that Lawler was apprehended ?
— I believe at Crumlin, I was so fatieued ray-
self after the severe duty that week, that I
sent to Messrs. Godfrey and Atkinson to ar-
rest the people assembled at Crumhn.

Oliver Carleton, esq. swom.<*-£xa^nined by

Mc. KelU.

Did jqia receive a^iy directions from alder-
man James, with respect to Kennedy ?

Mr. JM* Aia/(y.---My lords, I submit that no
evidence can he given with regard to Kennedy,
who is not upon his trial.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain, — ^Recollect the
tendency of this examination. The witness
gave an account of these papers, that he
saw Coiiby swear Lewis to tnese papers, and
that Kennedy took them up, ang put them
into his fob. Surely if it appears they were
found there, it wtH l>e some evidence of the
identity of these papers, to go to the jury.

Mr. M'Nally. — My lords, there is no evi-
dence that the prisoner was sworn upon these
paners.

Mr. Attorney General* — ^The only object of
Mr. Carleton's tesHmony is to let in these
papers to be read. Wli^t efiect tiiey may
nave is another ouesUon.

Mr. KfilU, — ^where did yon find these
papers.* — In the fob of Kennedy's breeches.

how came you to sevch there? — ^Bythe
particular dtrec^ns of alderman James.

These are tbe papers ?— Xbey are.

John Mkinton esq. sworn.— Bxaminetf by Mf^

Ruxion,

Did you hold any office in this city?— Yes^
sir, constable of the south division.

Did you set any directions in August last
to apprehend any person P«— I did.

Dm you execute those orders? — I did.

Whom did you appjietiemj^ ao4 wbsie ? — I
went to Crumlin, and apprehended five
peofl4e, Lawler was one of them.

You took him by the dix:ections of alderman
James ? — Yes.

Cotif^.— "Was it so &r as Crumlin ?— It was
near it

Cross-examined by Mr. M^Nalfy.

Crumlin is in the county of Dublin ?— .1 be-
lieve so.

William Finnegan sworn. — Examined by Mc
SoMciior General,

Where did yon live in August last ? — In a
place called the Biack-quarry-road, in the
neighbourhood of Stoneybattec : near hand
to it.

There is a road intervening between your
: house and BlacKhorse-lane?*-There is a lane,
but itdoes not go throueh. I am nearer Glass-
neyin than Blackboc9e-Iane.

Was your house ever robbed ?---|t was.

About what time? — I do not know: it
might be in August, the beginning of the
mouth.

X

S19J

36 GEORGE III.

Triak ojlhg Dejhtders-^

tsao

There were some arms taken out ?— There

was.

Have you a hell in your house ? — I have.

Mention what happened at the time of the
robhery ?— It was on Sunday night; that I am
certain of, though the witness said it was
lltfonday or Tuesday. The first thing that
alarmed me was throwing stones at a window ;
I got out of bed : they threw so hard against
the window, I was afraid of opening it. They
then broke the pannel of the door, and I de-
sired the woman to rin^ the bell.

Where is the bell situated? — Inthevard,
there is a rope through the house, and the
woman rung it from withinside.

Were there arms taken ? — ^A brass barrelled
blunderbuss, and a liisee, and a couple of
pistols.

What is become of your nephew who was
in the house tti^t night ?— I do not know : he
made examinations of that : I saw him swear
the examinations.

He swore to the arms ? — I do not know, I
was not present, when the examinations were
drawn.

The arms were produced to him? — No, they
were produced to me.

Did you hear, durinz the time of the rob-
bery, any person compmining of the ringing
of the bell? — ""*
broken—-

[The papers were then ofiercd to be read.]

-When I went out, the door being

Mr. Jlf'Ais%.--- 1 object to this as illegal
evidence.

Mr. Solicitor General. — Did you hear any
conversation going on, while the robbery was
committing? — Not while the robbery was
goin^on,! did not.

Did you hear the persons say any thing ?—
One of the persons asked me, why I rung the
bell ; I said the reason was, to prevent myself
from being robbed.

Cross-examined by Mr. M^Nally.

You say it was a woman was ringing the
bell. — It was.

Had she lived with you any time ?— She had.

Who else was in the house? — A little boy,
and my nephew.

Where was the boy ? — In bed.

Where was the nephew?— He was up,
and threw the blunderbuss out of the window
and it was broke, Which displeased them.

The blunderbuss that was broke was yours?
-^Itwas.

Then the door was not broke open by a
blunderbuss ?— No^ but by the axle-tree of a
cart.

Who was in the room with the woman who
jimg the bell?--. She was in the kitchen.

Was your nephew ill-treated that night by
any person ?-*No.

His heels were not knocked from under
him ? — No.

He never rung the bell that night?— No,
he fid not.

What night was this robbery?-— Eleven
o'clock on Sunday night.

Mr. M'Nalfy. — ^My lords, these papers are
not evidence to go to the jury. They stand
in a very different situation from what they
did when they were read upon the former
trial, or I would not make tne objection, be*
cause I consider myself bound to submit to
every rule laid down by this Court It does
not appear that those papers werei ever in the
possession of the prisoner, that they were ever
shown to him, or ever read in his hearine. li
does not appear, that these papers and the
prisoner were, in any one instance, ever to-
gether. I conceive, that the rule of evidence
with respect to papers is this; if the paper be
found in the possession of a man^ it becomes
evidence to go to the jury to consider for what
purpose he had it in his possession. Or, if
the paper be proved to be in the haud^writin^
of the prisoner, then, after proof of that, it
may be read in evidence against him. But,
if you recur to the evidence of Lawler, he haa
not presumed to say, that these papers were
in the band-writins; of Leary. He saw the

Erisoner at Stoneybatter ; there was a paper
lid upon a book, and sometlung said, which
he does not know, but it does not appear
that either of these was the paper laid upon
the book. Therefore, without going into the
argument at large, I submit these papers
ought not to be read. If it did appear that
these papers were at the meeting at Stoney-
batter, the objection might be weened. But
there is no evidence of that, nor that they
were read, so that the prisoner might know
their contents. And no papers are ever read
against a prisoner, unless there be some evi-
dence that he knew their contents and as-<
sented to them.

Mr. Pritne SerjeanL^My lords, I conceive
that these papers ought to be read upon twoi
grounds. The principle upon which you have
already determined one or two points of evi^
dence goes directly to determine the admissi*
bility of these papers, independant of the
ground upon which they were originally oi«
lered. The principle upon which the general
acts of a body are admissible against an indi-
vidual of that body applies to these papers*
The witness says he was sworn upon these
papers. The signs were then coomiunicated
to him; and upon a meeting between him
and the prisoner, there was a communication
between them of one or more signs^ particu- .
lariy the sign of pressing the thumb upon the
back of the hand. The ground upon which
these papers were offered, is, as expianaitory of
what was said by Hart, acquiesced in by th&
prisoner, and acted upon that very night. The
next ground upon which I eonoe ive it to be
admissible, even if the general ground were
out of the case, is this. These papers were
brought forward in support of the consistency
of the witness, Lawler ; to show that he bad
at difierent times made the same decUratioBs
—that he pointed out these papers aa being ii^

«11

John LearyfoT High TrMton*

A. D. 1795.

[322

the pocsessten of Kennedy; and the same
priadple which induced the Court to let us
into evidence of the place where the papers
urere ibund, calls upon the Court to look at
the papers tbemseWes.

Mr. Attorney Gen€rul,-^My lords, these
papers were produced at a meeting of De-
tenders. Dry, Coffey, and Kennedy met at
Cork-street Kennedy produced the papers,

five them to Coffey, who swore Lewis, and
ennedy put them up. This goes to show

the system and design among them, and

. Mr. Justice CAomMriatn.— I am of opinion,
this is evidence to go to the jury, in the point
of view mentioned, namely, as evidence of the
intentions, schemes, and designs of the per*
aons associated under the name of Defenders ;
and if we stop this evidence, it would inter-
rupt the train of such discovery. It cannot
be denied, that there is evidence to go to the
jury of the proceedii^ of Defenders. The
first meeting was in &mick-8treet where an
oath was ulministered to the witness, and
certain private sienals communicated to him
to be introduced oy : — the prisoner was ac-
quainted with them, and communicated them
to the witness ; therefore the papers must be
material to develq>e the real design of these
persons. It is of the essence of this charge,
that the jury should be convinced of what the
schemes of the Defenders were, and there is.
nothing more proper to show that, than these
papers, because the jury may infer that every
man associated must have been privy to their
designs, provided they think the papers aie
the same, and of that they will be reminded
hereafter.

[The papers were then read. See them in
the indictment.]

Mr. M^NaUy now addressed the Court and
Jury, as counsel on the part of the prisoner;
and commenced the defence of his dient by
regretting the great disadvantages under
which the unfortunate man necessarily la-
boured, from being deprived of that sreat aid
which all men derive, who have the good
fortune of being supported bv the extraonU-
xiary and brilliant abilities of his friend Mr.
Currao, assigned with him, as counsel for
the prisoner ; but who, in consequence of a
particular event, was precluded from appear-
ing in his professional character, on the pre-
sent most serious and interesting occasion^

But though standing alone, he said he
would rouse his mimi from depression;
though weak and fiitigued, yet he felt conso-
huion from the cheering recollection, that the
presiding judges, before whom he pleaded
for the life of the prisoner, were not less
eminent for their constitutional principles and
l^^l knowledge, than distinguished and
revered for their patience and humanity.
From the jury also, he received comfort
Some of them were nerBonally and intimately
known to hink— witn.tbe chsmcters of all he
waa acquaiitffd— and he was eoomced that

VOL. XKVJL

In. addressing them, he submitted his thoughts
to fellow citizens, from whose wisdom and
good nature he had to expect every fistvour
and induleence ; and from whose verdict, the
prisoner Had to expect such a decision, as
would be consistent with minds equal to the
arduous task of discriminating between right
and wrong, between truth and imposilion,
between affected candour and hypocrisy ; and
of adducine from the evidence before them,
such a conclusion as would fullv satisfy their
own consciences, and be entit1e<l to the appro-
bation of the pubhc, for whom they were
trustees.

He here adverted to the statement which
had been made, on the part of the crown, by
the attorney-general, on opening the case;
which he observed set forth a number of
facts that did not afterwards appear in evi-
dence, and which, of cotirse, the junr were
bound to expunge from their recollection,
when thev came to contemplate upon the ver«
diet which they should pronounce, and which,,
by the rules of justice, must result solely^
from testimony given in proof by the wit-
nesses, and credited by the jury. He hoped
it would not be understood, that in making
this observation, it was his intent to insinuate
in the slightest manner, any imputation that
could affect the known candor ol the first law
officer of the crown — No, on the contrary, he*
considered himself called upon, having this
opportunity, publicly to declare, that hu-
manity to the prisoner, as well as zeal to the*
crown, had on everv prosecution as well as
the present, marked that eentleman's pro-
fessional conduct, and bore honourable testi'-
mony to the benignitv of his mind.

There vrere, he said, some principal objects
to which he would presume to solicit the
attention of the jury. ITiese objects were ; —
First, llie oath they had taken-; secondly, the
preeminence of the great and sacred charac-
ter who prosecuted; third, the approver exa-
mined as a witness; and fourth, the nature
of the evidence, which that approver had di-
vu]fl;ed in support of the indictment.

nere Mr. AfNallv said that, in respect to
the last object he had to submit to the jury, the
nature of the evidence, he felt the highest satis-
faction and great relief from having perceived
that several of ^e jurors had, during the course
of the trial.been sedulously employed in taking
notes of what had past, by which they would
be the better able to correct any errors that mis*
conception on his part might lead them into,
and he hoped they would rectify his mistakes,
when he came to the statement of evidence,
as it was certunly not his intention wilfully
to misrepresent a single iota of the evidence,
or to make a single observation not founded
in fact

He then proceeded to the first point he
had proposed to submit to the jurors' consi-
deiatlcm, and it called for their most serious
attention, he meant the nature of that oath
which they bad taken when called upon as

T

S?3J 36 GpOHQfi m.

Tmlt ojike D/sfir»^»^

[M4

Iriors of tbf pnsoiVfV*- T\)fiy vottld recoUect
thov bad 9Worii tbjit *' Ih^y would well and
trury try s^^d |rue df Uvecance ipake between
their sovereign lof d the kiaf^ %nd the prieuner
^t ibe bar, aqd i| tnie verdict give aoootding
to the evideoce'*<t-*thf5r weuld leeellect that
^n swearing thu», ^bey bad appealed to the
Almighty Opd to punitsb them if they did not
io impartial justice. To find according to the
evidence wa^ the obligation of the oath. Now
what does finding accovding to the evidence
import ?—It imports m les3 than this» thai
a jyry should ootfipd ^ verdict of guihyon^
any proof that was not convincing, clear and
Strong, as holy writ ; that was not free from
imputation a^nd divested of doubt That
evidence on wbiob e itiima'9 life depended,
on which % i^a^'s life might be the forfeit,
9bpiild be uncloudeid, unshadowed bv uncer-
talp^ and elear as the sun at mid^clay : for
evidence U that which puts the matter in
i^sue on the ground of cer^inty ; where there
is a doubt in a criminal case, there cannot be
a conclusion, of guilt against a priaoner, but
tthece must be a verdict of acquittal. Unless
every man op the ju^ is convinced of the
prisoner*s guilt, they aio bound bjr their
oalhs, they are oempeUed by their con-
sciences, thev %re called uj^n by the rigid
principles of justice, they are directed by the
imperative voi^e of mercy to acquit* — It was
for this reason, that by the old law piisoners
accused ot capital crimes were not allowed to
exculpate theaw>alveQ by the testimony of
witnesses; the rule however was weak and
«iangerous, thcwgh the mpiive assigned to it
was merciful a^l benign. No man, says
lord Coke, shouid be eonivicted bul on elear
^d indubitable evidence, and that is the rea-
son, continues his lordsbip» that prisoners
were not allowed witnesses by the common
law. Here Mr. M'Nally enteoed isto. the
d.anger of dewing conelusione Arom in-
ferences or implications, and cauiinned the
jury to form, their verdict sokly from fecta
given in prooA

Mr. M*Naliy now gave a short statement of-
the indictment ^gainst the prisoner. By this
indictment, he observed, Um prifioqer stands
charged with two disUaet speeitts of hi^h- %rea»«
son, the most enoimeuis offence which the
law recoenizes, qr of which the subject can be
guilty. The fiifst cbera^ is that *^ tie prisoner
at thebar with olher false traitors did asaoeiale
themselves for the purpose of aiding and as-
sisting the persons eiercising the |K>wfrs of
government in France, &o«, waging war
against the king, and did oompMaand ima-

fine the death of our soveseigD lord the
ii^ with an intent our lord' the king takiM
and put to. death,'' The second ebarge
against the prisoner is, that *' he was adhereni
to the king's enemies 9Wi9g them aid and
cpmforl,'' and both these efincea wen de-
clared to be high treaaon by itatotn the a&th
of Edward 3rd, anA that statute exneeaafy
tequired that tbe pitft|r aooiaeA ef high trea^

SOD, be thereof, upo»euficient proof attain^
af some overt or open not by men ofhia own
eondition^lhal is by a jury.

Aa to tlie first of tbesa chains i« cHd not
appear to him, that any overt act ef eompasa-
ing and imagining the king's death had been
given iiT evidence^ and therelbre he weuH
not now urge any argument upon the law oq
that species of troMoa, or recapitulate those
which on a foraser eecasinn he had submitte<t
to the opinion of the Court. On the oeeaaioii
he alluoed to, his objections had been over*
ruled by the Court, and certain it was, the
judsmeat of the Court was supported by Hie
highest autboritiea : authorities to which he
must submit, though not convinced : they
merited every reapect from him» and it was
his duty to bow with reverence tp their judg**
ment. Here he again urged that the law re-
specting the first charge in the indicteent
need not be stated to the jury; for tfaaf.
though the indbtment spread its terrror»over
six skins of parchment, exhibiting no less than
sixteen specific overt acta of treason, vet net
one of tnose overt acts apphed to the first
charge, and he believed the learned jndgea
who presided, would be of opinion, that onljr
two overt acts had relation to the second, fi>r
which reason, he would take into eontempla'^
tion onl^ the second count, and those overt
acts which appeared to support it.

Aa to the law on the second ocunt or
charge in the indietment, it struck him, that
the species of treason set fbrth therein, con-
tained two branohee. First, ^ being adherent
to the king'a enemies in his realm, and giving
them aid and comfort therein/' Secondly,
" being adherent to the king's enamiea, and*
giving them aid and comfo|t clsewbore," that
IS, out of the realm. The offence charg^
upon the prisoner, andionwhieh the overt aet^
were grounded^ was olearfy ^e- first branch-
of the second speciee of treason,^ ^^bein^
adherent to the king's enemies willmi. the
realm,'^but he submitted to the Court tfiat.
there was no evidence to show an adherence
to Uie king's enemies viihin the reafm :
for there was no proof before the jury,
that the king| had enemiee within the r»ilm.
Perhaps it might he* asked, are not rebels th^
king's enemies R Are not traitora foee tn*
thatr spvereiff n f— The answer is, that* tn ce»>
tensplatioaofkiws persons of such descriptioa-
arenotthekingfaenemtee. No man o%Mng
aliegiance to the crown^, whether natural ^!l&-
panca (which inetuded aN hie imdes^'a suh-
jeds)* or local aliegiance (which inetuded-
^en residenta) were in oontem|»latioA oT
law the king's enemies; the- enemies meant
by the statute of Edward 9rd, were to bemr-
derstood the euhjeetso# fbreiga-powersi with-
whom the nation is at open war, aiMi^theM
did not appear a scinttlkiof evidenee. mthe
course of tno tnal to shvw that the prisoner*
at the barhadadtered to> or givelt $^^w had,
abetted suoh- fcrcigners, or liel^' the Itata
cannexioni or the- tlightmt inteifoana wl)ii'

MS]

J«Aii Learyfgr High Trtiuon.

A. b. i't&S.

im

them Wftliia or wilh6iil the mim. Tkt
tbwigay Im •bserved, waa novel, Ihoiigh tfat
kw which provided agaimt ic was aDciant
He doubtM if there was a precedent to be
loHndin the hooks more recent than the reign
of qileen Elizabeth. He had seen one in the
etele trials of that reign, but it was so loose
mad fiuiltj as not to be an authority. Adhering
to the king's eneoiios without the realm was
a mofe frequeat offence, but no buch offence
waa set forto in the indictment, nor any overt
act of such an offence. The o^ ert acts of this
species of treason as described by the books,
were, writing and sending letters of intelli-
gance lo the enooiy, supplying them with
mmaef^ or supplying them with provisions^
or warlike stores, or other articles of a similar
«atwe, not one of which overt acts appeared
ia the indktinent. ■ If, however, the Court
were of opinion, that the second count was
well laid, tie submitted that the only facts in
fioof that applied to it, were those whieb
tedded 4o establish the Af^h and eighth overt
acts* and that he would observe upon those
teu and^he credit thej deserved, wtieii
be came to speak on the evidence given by
4jiwler the approver.

Mr. M'Nalfy now caUed the aileotieil of
tiw ji«y lo the second ol^ecl^the prosecutor.
Who was the prosecutor? The prosecutor
was the kin^ A character sacred^ pre^emi-
aent, aad panmount toaU others known to the
cOaititMtion« A character to) whom, politic
cally speaking, thd kw attributed immortality
and peneeiion-*-ii character so elevated, that
a gyeat coosliliitknal writer, after mentioning
te prcTOgativea aad hia reveoues, ascribee to
bin so great and so traOscendant a nature,
that he Mds^ the people are led to pay him
the meet awful respect^ and to look up to him
«s supetior to othet beings. But that respect
fad revcreiiee due to the sovereign, must sot
iottrfere yritb justice ; must not inikience a
Jui;y, bound by their oaths to determine by
the intrinsic weight of evidenced, not by inAu-
eace arising from eatrioeic causes. The
MPOD^est proof a jury can give of loyalty and
affection to their sovereign is, to administer
fjBqnrtial justice to his subjects. The jury
wcndd keep in their minds that his mi^esty
4}id aoC come forward, on the present occasion,
to srosecHle lor an offeace against a private
individual; but for an offence the most
heinous that the law lecognizcd ; for no less
an offence than an intent to destroy his own
sacred lifi^ by bringing war and desolation on
the land. The horrer that arose from tlie
cstsii|ilation of such a crime, nay ^om the
ialimatioo of it, mast strike a deep aad sen-
sible impression into the mind of every man
--»4Mit he eonmred the jury agaui to recollect
the aaiuie or the oalh they had token; to
jjttdgft solely frona the evidence, and that to
detonbtne fairly they must divest their hearts
of all passion, and tiieir minds of all bias;
Kbey sasnld neittmr act from feelings nor from
influence; and thai w^thoftiC a denlactioD of

both, however worthy the niotivFs might be
which guided tbeni, they could not decide
c^nselefiuously the issue they were sworn to
tiy, and truly to determine between the king
and the prisoner.

Look now, said he, on the witness — turn
voor eyes on William Lawler the approver :
by his own confession, he stands before yon
a principal actor in the perpetration of
a catelogue of crihies the most atrocious
and shocking. Contemplate for a moment
the transgressions of this miscreant (in
which he would implicate the prisoner) and
consider his condtict seriously before yon give
credit to his evidence. In What character
does he come forward P In that of an ap-
prover, that is a culprit, who being charged
With a crime or crimen, for the purpose c>f
saving his own life accuses atiether. It can-
not M very material t6 a man of such a de-
scription whether he eohvkts the innocent oi*
the guilty. A wretch who by his own con-
fession atlempted murder against the law,
would have Httle eompurictioa it\ cbmmittin^
murder tinder the sanction of the law,
when safety to Ids own life wds the rewarcf.
He said under the sanction of the law, be^
cause an accomplice is clearly a competent
witness, whether he be indicted or ool, and
for this plain reason, that if tne evideace of
such a man was entirely rejected, many
crimes of the most enormous nature migljt be
perpetrated with impunity, ^t there existed .
a general role of law in such Cases, to which
the court shad always paid a tenacious regard,
aad which must strongfy impress the jury,
when stoted to them by the tedrned judges on
the liench it was this-^that unless some fair
aad unpolluted evidelrce was produced, corro^
borating and communicating a verisimilitude
to the testimony of the accomplice, that tes*
tiasoay ought to have no weight with the
jiwy. This was a rule of benignity, and he
troukl venture to assert that the law reporters
could produce but one exception to ft ; a soli-
tary case reported by Mr. Leacb, of a trisci
berore jodge Buller, in England, and that ex-
ception did not forcibly apyty here, for in that
case^ the withess on whose single testimony
the jury founded a verdict of guilty, was not
impeached for the commission of any offenc^,
saving that individual one in Which he had
been a p€irtkep$ crirnmit ; he did not appear
pied with an accumulation of black offences;'
attempts at murder and conspiracies for as*
sassination. The jury would not forget Law-
ler*9 eoofessiou of faith. No, they would re-
member that though he swore on the holy
evangelists that he at present believed in th^
existence of a God, he yet hud acknowledged
the impious fact that his faith in the Trinity
had been shaken. That though he had been
heretofore instructed in thte Protestant reli-
|ton,yet he acknowledged hehadbeeA seduced*
worn the principles of Christianity to the scep-
tical opinions ot deism. But impiety of a much
grosser aliture thaadeisa) would be proved

387]

96 0£ORGB UL

Truii ofA$ D^mderMm

[SS8

jipoD him by witnesses of credit It would be
proved Ihat Mr. Lawler bad not only openly
^nd repeatedly declared his disbelief in the
Trinity, but in the existence of aoj of its
members : that he had denied the divinity of
each of the three divine persons; that his
creed admitted of no deity, of no translation
of the soul, but recoenized only one melan-
choly opinion, that ** death is eternal sleep ;"
that inan^ like the inanimate tree, lies
where be falls, sinking to all eternity into
Lii native earth, incapable of renovation
or ascension into future life. Such was the
'diabolical religion, at least such had been the
infamous professions of Mr. Lawler the
atheist apd approver. — Such was the infernal
instigation unaer which this unbelieving wit-
ness had acted ; whose call was not like that
of St Paul, from infidelity to the true faith,
but who, like Julian the apostate renounced
the Dreceptsof the true faith to become an
infidel and a persecutor. — To him may be well
applied an epigram made on a Mmilar charac*
racter ; on a wretch who bavinglong professed
and disseminated the precepts of atheism, re»
ceived the sacramenti m order to qualify for a
pi

** Who now can think recanting odd,

** To shun a present evil,
^ That wretch who oft' denied his God,

** Has now denied the Devil.''

Such is the delineation of Mr, Lawler's reli-

fious theory; let us now take a slight view of
is moral practice. Outof bis own mouth the
jury should judae of his morality — mark his
confessions m tne course of his cross^exami*
nation. He had been discharji^ed, or be had
ran away, for he did not positively say which,
from his first master, Mr. Robmson, on a
suspicion of theft. He had confessed having
taken an oath of fidelitv when he enlisted, and
having premeditately broken that oath when
he deserted; of having solemnlv sworn not
to prosecute the unhappy deluded youths with
whom he associated, and whom he had se-
duced into clubs, and of having perjured him-
self by the breach of that obligation. It was
true h,e had not acknowledged an intent to
commit murder, for when asked, who fired
the pistol into the watch-house, in the at-
tempt to rescue, he refused to answer that
question, well knowing the consequence.
But, was not that refusal a tacit confession of
the crime ? Was it his innocence t>f the charge,
or his prudence to avoid punishment for the
crime, prevented an answer P The jury were
the judges of that, and the jury would apply
this refusal to his credit On the question of
assassination, he was more candid, for with
audacity and composure, he had cooliv and de-
liberately stated having been one of four, who
had lain in wait to put Cockayne to death.
So that this witness, on the credit of whose
testimonv, the life of the prisoner at the bar
depended, stood himself before the juiy,
selt-arraignedt and pleading guilty to charges

of one intended murder, two peipelfited per-
juries, and a premeditated aseaarination !
Could his credit support such a weight of ac-
cumulated guilt? The act of discnarginga
pistol into the watch-house, might, no aount,
by the ingenuity of argument, be palliated
and softened down to manslaughter, in case
a life had been lost— It might be construed
into an act of passion without malice prepense;
but the intended assassination of Cockayne
had none of these qualities, the intention there
was blackened with the most implacable ma-
lignitv, and had the fact been accomplished^
would have amounted to murder of the most
aggravated enormity. Mark his ooohaeBS,
recollect his deliberaUon, previous to the
commencement of the diabolical deed — ^Ha
was awake in the ni^ht and, in the night he
arose and marched torth armed, for the pur-
pose of assassination ! Would the jury cradit
such a witness as this? A miscreant lepro*
sied with, crimes, surrounded with fears for
bis own personal safety?— A miscreant with
the gallows in his front, the piik>ry in his
rear, and his pardon suspended* over hia
head, on condition Jthat he should support,
by his testimony in court, the information htf^
had sworn to before a magistrate.

It may be answered, and indeed it was
thrown out on a former occasion, that
the jury would give Mr. Lawler credit, be**
cause he was consistent Is not every liar
that fabricates a scheme of villany for reward,
or for impunity, consistent? Is it to be pre-*
sumed, that a man of Mr. Lawler^ docility
and cunning, would not corroborate, on the
Uble, in the face of the Court, what he had
previously promulged and sworn before alder-
man James ? Every man knows the melan-
choly story of the unfortunate youths, who
suflfered an ignominious death in London,*
ftom the periured evidence of Salmon and
Gahaj^. These wretches swore awa^ the
lives of their fellow creatures, to acquire re-
wards given by statute, on conviction for
highway robberies, and there evidence was
always consistent: so was the evidence of
Titus Oates aud his associates, and so would
the evidence of conspimtors, such as Mr.
Lawler, ever be found.

Mr. M'Nally having concluded his descrip-
tion of the approver, proceeded to observe
upon such parts of the evidence as, he said,
appeared material in the case, if any thiu^
could appear material coming from the mouth
of such a man ; and as he thought the whole
should be narrowed to what hful been sworn
to have passed at the meeting at Stoneybatter,
he would confine himself to the facts respect-
ing that meeting.

It had been sworn by Mr. Lawler, thai the
prisoner had been there, at a meetii^ of a so-
ciety calling themselves Defenders, but it
did not appear that be ever attended that

• Sec the Uial of Stephen M
others, antip VoL 19, p. 7i5. .

and

389]

JoAfli Lkayjbr Hi^ Treuon*

A. D. 1795.

[SSO

■odel^ a SKOod timey a ciicuiiistaiice which
must impMss the rary with a belief thai if he
had been even there, be was disgusted with
their proceedings, and dropped their associa-
tion. He was not, however, answerable as a
traitor, even if he had been present at one
meetings and saw and heard whist passed, for
he only concealed what he had seen or heard,
without showing an approbation by a second
Ttsily and to conceal treason except in case of
an actual conspiracy to kill the king, was not
treason, but only a misprision; a crime of a
different species from tnat for which the pri"
•oner was mdicled.

The most serions part of the overt acts he
conceived to consist m taking those oaths or
obli^tion% which had been read from the
papers found by Mr. Carleton, the peace of-
ficer, on the person of Kennedy. But was
there any evidence to support that overt act —
was there any proof that the prisoner had
taken oaths, or either of them ? not an iota of
|»oof ! — ^not so much as a reasonable presump-
tion ; for there was not proof that he had ever
tead those papers, or liad even beard them
lead, or was present when any oath of any
kind was administered. Neither was it in
proof, before the jury, that the papers which
lay on the table in the house at Stoneybatter
contained an oath or obligation, nor was it
pretended, that such paper was one of those
which had been admitted to be read in evi-
dence by the Court A person named Hart, as
sworn by the approver, bad put his hand upon
a paper that lay on the taole; but the ap*
prover declared he did not hear any thing that
nad passed on that occasion; so that, for
aught he knew, nothing had passed, and if
any thing of consequence did pass, or if any
thing treasonable was said, it was equally clear
that the prisoner had net seen or neard znj
thing; but it appeared be was in liquor— it
appwed he was so situated that he could
neither hear what was said nor see what was
done.

Ue then urged that no intimacy had ap-
peared by evidence to have subsisted between
the approver and prik)ner on any other occa-
sion. He had not been on the party at the
watch-house, when the approver was wounded,
in attempting to commit murder. Ue had not
been called upon to join the conspirators who
premeditated the assassination of Cockayne ;
in short, it did not appear be had been at any
meeting but one at Stoneybatter; and there
was no satisfactory evidence before the jury,
even from the approver himself^ that any trea-
son was agitated at that meetmg in the pre-
sence or hearingi or by the assent of the pri-
soner.

Mr. M^ally now touched on the difference
of tlie slatute law in cases of high treason, in
England and IreUnd. In Eneland, he ob-
served, the prisoner would not nave been put
tipon bis defence, but must have been ac-
quitted on the evidence given for the crown ;
ror there one witness^ iMUgh perfectly cre-

dible, IS well as competent could not aflecta
prisoner charged wiih high treason—tliere the
l%islature, ieakMis of crown prosecutions, and
tenacious of the subject^s safety, had prudently
and cautiously provided, that to sanction and
support a conviction of high treason, there
roust be two credible witnesses to one overt
act, or one credible witness to one overt act
and a second witness lo another overt act of
the same species of treason. The Irish sta-
tute had not adopted a similar provbion, and
as the parliamentary law of Eneland had no
force, and he trusted never would have force,
in Ireland, he could not urge the English
statute as an authority; though he would
ventare to state it as containing a -principle
wise and salutary, and which should hsve
weight with the jury as beine derived from the
common law, which was tne same In both
countries. The principle was this, that one
man's oath was as good, in point of law, as
another's, and therefore in per|ury, there must
be two witnesses at least, to convict: for the
oath of the single person charged was as strong
and conclusive evidence of his innocence as
the oath of the person charging was of his
guilt. This rule spplied, with great effect, to
cases of high treason, because as every man llv*
ing within the realm, under the protection of
the laws, owed in return for that protectran^
allegiance to the crown, which he could not
transfer or divest himself of, that oath of al-
legiance balanced in the scale of justice the
oath of any single witness. Every man is
presumed to have taken the oath of allegiance
— the jury must presume that Leary the pri-
soner Had taken that oath, and that oath should
not onlv counterpoise, but preponderate
against the oath of Lawler, whose credit was
impeached, shaken, nay," sapped and over-
turned by his own confe'ssion of havine broke
the oath of attestation, which he had solemnly
sworn, when he inlisted and promised true
faith, aUegiance and loyalty, to nis miyestjr.

When the Jury took these observations
into their consideration, he trusted they would
not convict a man upon evidence impeacha-
ble and inconclusive ; evidence whicn could
only raise a presumption of guilt If any
treason appeared, he submitted, it was but
constructive treason — what was constroction {
— the besl^lives thai England ever boasted,
the greatest characters that ever served their
country and supported its constitution, had
been sacrificed to construction — It was si
boundless ocean without limits — should a
jury venture on it» they would find themselves
without compass, without sail, without
rudder, without chart to euide them— they
would be tost by the undulation of every
wave and sported with by every storm :
till striking upon some sunken rock, or
drawn into some whirlpool, they and their
bark would be dashed to pieces, or foundering
sink into a treacherous abvssi It was un
certainty a jur^r should found their verdict, —
certainty resulting from the ooaviction of un*

m]

96 OBORGE III.

TfM e^M# Df^mkrs^

[ass

inp«iGhtfi evidoiiM. CMttmeiiMi va« •&
h^ • icbein« of cbanos, a wbtel fron
wU«Qoe ihe propeniea* the liberlaea tod Uvea
«f ibe inosi uprigbi ud hooounibk might by
^M^oet be drawo at the will of the diractdn^
till every man of worth wmI eatimatkMi
in the country dropped off as by lotteiy.
> I^. M^NiUfy coocluded b^ again adverting
%o the beHKHiBnesa of the crraie charged upon
the prisoner, and described to the jury the
dreadful sentence and horrid execution which
lyould ineviuhly svcoeed a verdict of convic-
tion. It was, he aaidt the croel ioveation of
savage and biirbaiovs times ; the moat severe
that staiaed with blood the Uaok page of tiie
cnmiaal code.'^-^It was the vindictive senlence
of irritated and insatiate vengeaocct not the
puaiihment of pure and disimpassiooed jua-
tice. It wM not confined to death, but ea«
tended to torture, mutilating and disfiguring
the dignified image of God, aAer whose form
ure were taught to believe man was msde^-^
But it wentTartlier than even the destruction
oftlie offisnding object, it visited the sins of the
father upon the inqoceot children, by taiatiug
and corrupting the currw»t of their blood ; by
«iarlung them like the devoted offispring of
ihe first murderer, turniAg them abroad wan-
d^reiiy outcasiSi and vag^«ata over the face of
tbe earth.

Sanmei GMind sworn.— Examined by Mr.

APNatfy,

00 you know William Lawler, alias
Wnghtf <^I know him by the name of
liawler.

From the general character which he bears
in life, do vou QOiisi<ler him to be a aaan, who
ought to have credit upon his oath, giving
evidence in a court of justice ?--I do not.

Samuel Oaihnd cross-examined by Mr. Prime

SerjeoWt,

Where do you live ?— In Crane-lane.
. Of what business are you f-^I an a grocer
but served my time to a hair-dresser.

How long have vou lived there?— Since
I was two years ofd« I am near 21 yean
ihere.

How long have you been a grocer ?— Two
years«

. Were you ever a member of a society ?— I
was of a reading society.

What was Uie name of it?-*It had no
name, it was so young, before I lef\ it.

What did you read ?-^The papers of the
day :-*Chambers's dictionary.

It was not politics you read ? — ^Not at alL
la the course of conversation it might; but
it was not the principal part.

Was it not the principal motive for intro-
ducing those dubs? — ^Not whea I was a
member of it.

When waa this club established ?— Some
time af\er Lawler came from England, he
asked me, was there any society in Dublin I
I said» No :•— Ua said^ tl^e might be some

laadiog aacitty, and be asked me lo be*
come a member^ aad ny brolber, and others.

Were you ever a member of asgr other
society ?— Never

Was not your brother a member of the
Philanthropic?-^! believe he was.

Was not he a member of the Telegrmphic ?
-^No, I believe not

You say vou are a grocer ?-<-Ye8.

You deal in spirits ?-*-No, tea, and sagar
only*

Was jTour brother a member of that so*
ci^ which eapired so soon ?<*-He waa.

Did you ever hear of such a socielv as Do-
teders ?— I have heard of them as a My, but
not aa a societv.

Do you not beliei^ such a society eiiata ?— I
believe they oxist, when men have fidlen m^
orifices to it

What do you believe are their designs r
Were the^* aot criminal ?— I cannot say ; I
should think they ^"^^ crtmiaaL

Have the goodness to tell us whv. you did
not continue in tbe society, as weU as your
brother ?— I had not time, and i deserted il
before it was dissolved. They were scrambling
about a chairasaa and secretary and party
matters, and there was no knowledge to be
acquired, but noise and confiision.

Was Burke a aaember of thai socid^?*-
He was.

Can yon leoolleot the nanwaof afiy others f
—Not many. There was mytelf, my bvo*
ther, Lawler, an acquaintance of Lawler's^
one Strut, in short there was not many, Ig
or 14.

Did you know John Lb Blanc ?-*^l did.

Was he a member ?— No.

How long have yois been acquainted wish
him?— ^mc time afker Lawler came frooa
England. It was through Lawler, I became
acquainted with him.

Did you know Leary ?— No.

Do you know Dry ?— No.

Did you know Weldon? — No; I never saw
him untH his triaL

Do you know Brady or Kemiedy ?—• >NeL

Did you know Cofiey ?— I did know one
Coftey.

Dkl you know Flood ?^No.

Clayton ?— No.

Lewis? — No.

Haidon?— No.

liart?— No.

You knew only Coffey?— That was all,
and my acquaj&tanofe with hioa wa» very
sliftht.

lou were sunsmoned upon the last trial ?*^
JL was.

Tell how you came to communicate what
you knowol Lnn^ier?-^! loM If toMf. BtAea.

Who ia ho?— A hatter in Parliamnit-sUeei,
who told it to the attorney, I belinve who
summoned me.

W»s Bates a measber of any of the ckibs r
—Now

How came you u> knnw that Lmrkr wa&ta

SSS]

JMk hearyjm H^k TreatoH

A. D. 1795.

CSM

^Te evidftnc«? — ^I did not know, bat I roen-
tioned thai I knew the man, and what his
character was.

Vou tlioaght Lawler was undent a heavy
charge, and it was cruel in you to oppress
htmf— I did not, but said, I was sorry for
liiiii. f told Bates again, when he heard that
Lawler was turned approver.

Yon wished Lawler well ?— Yes.

And then when Bates told yon, that Lawler
was turned informer, this roan whom you
wiahed well, was such a man as was not to
liabehefved?— Bates sent to me, and I went
10 him, to Castle^ street, where he lives, he
asked me, " how long I knew Lawler" — I.
said, for many years. "What do you
know of him ?^— I told htm all I knew about
bini, and then I was sent for by Flood.

Who is he?'— An attorney; and it is by
that I am obliged ta teH what I have.

Have you a good many friends that you are
aKskkus for, whom you would not befieve
upon their oaths?-- ^.

Have you any other fHend, who oug^t not
to be believed upon his oath? — I believe I
liavew I

Mp. H^NaUjf, — ^My lords, I beg leave to
suggest a question. Whtrther the witness
ever hod any oonveraalioD with Lawler, rv-
^>eetin| his principle&of religion ?— I had.

Mr. M*JKrf/^.— TeH the jury, what it was.
• WUne9i.-^\t his first coming from Eng-i
land, I peifoeived he was a Deist, and denied
that JeJns Christ ww the Son of God. I was
ahoelced at it.— He said, the only way to be-
come reconciled to it, was to read upon it, —
I said, it was. a. shocking piece of business,—
l^t, said he, I will go farther, lor I deny the
eatatence of a God. — Where, said L dt> you
4kink your soul will go after you die?— he
answered, No w4iere.

CoBF^.— How long did you continue in the
society after this ?— Not long,

Bf r. Prime Setjeant, — ^It was after you were
abocked by these irreligious opinions, that
you were an;cious about him, and went to
Bates? — H!s belief is nothing to me : in his
own hreast let it He.

Yocr kept him company after this?'-— He
came to my place, but I never went to him.

WiiSam Ebh sworn.— Examined by BI^.

Where do you live ?-*ln Ckthedral-Iane*.

H6W long have you known Lawler?-^.
About 19 months.

Where did he reside In that time ?— In my
house : he took a lodging ftom me.

Do.ywkdoio of Lawln^ having any thing,
concealed in vour house of a. remarkable
kipd ?^Nottill after Ke was apprehended.

IfOfSt you occasion to make a search in
his apartment? -— Ott my coming, home
to my breakfitft» ng^ wife told mc, she
Htw Mrf, Lawler g?- io^ ^^ yvd« ^^ ,
donceal something in 'the dirt-hole; 1 wont
out immediately, and found two leather bags, '

§ I

containing dO musket balls. I never had- a
bad opinion of him till I saw them, and I was
then shocked.

If Lawler swore that he had no ammunir
tion or balls, would he swear true?*-— No^
certainly he would not.

Have you ever conversed with Lawler upon
the subject of the Deity ? — No, I had very little
communication with him, though he lodged
with me.

You have heard of his character ? — I have.

From what you know of the general cha^
racter of Lawler, is he a man that ought to b^
believed by a jury, giving evidence in a court
of justice in a capital case .^— I would not be-
lieve him upon nis oath.

Were you ever a member of those societlest
—Never.

Were you solicited to become a member? —
I was.

By whom ? —By Lawler.

You did not become a member?— No, I
did not choose it: I asked him the intention
of it: he would not tell me till I was admitted.
He applied to me for a room in my house, foB
a society to meet in, and I refused. I did not
like him after that. His wife gave me a
pistol loaded with powder and ball.

Yo\i have been summoned on the part of
the crown and by the prisoner? — I have five
or six times, every day.

Who summoned you to attend Weldon'a,
trial } — The crown, and I was not called upon.

WUUamEibi cross-eKamioedi h^ Mb. Mtmmey

How long did Lawler live in your bouse T
— ^Twelve months since he took the fedging^
ikst.

When did he go to live with, you last? —
Five or six months before be was taken up.

During that time he followed his business ?
—He did.

And maintained his family ?— He did.

And conducted himself well ?-^For a tAme^
he did.

He was a member ofthose societies ^-r>I.
believe so. He told me so.

He was an active member?^! believe so,^
by his askine me.

You bearohis testimony this dav, and you.
were asked, if he had sworn, that he had not^
balla or powder in his room whether he would'
have sworn faUe. But if he did not so sweai.
but was asked, had he ball cafiridgct^vfouii
you disbelieve him?— There wa5 both pow-
der and ball in the pisioU

00 you know, any thing of rescuinj^ a pri-;
soner from the watch-bouse ?— I beard of it,
lu9^Dg,cut.

Was not that a lon&thne agp?— Xt was.

Mr. Attornmf Gtnerul^hnA if he swore,,
that a long time ago he had no cartridges,
aod^a h^ftetiiiMi alter, yoa fowat balls^ in the"
house or Sie room, would you thinkvou ought
to*cpiiclucfe» ha bad perjured himselK-^I ne9<i
not press you for an answer.

335} 96 GEORGE III.

At th« time he was arrested* woulil jou»
if asked, say, that he was not a man to be be-
lieved?—I would, for this reason —

Give me your reason ?«>-I would ; he told
my wife !>everal things, from which she said
he was a dangerous man. He never kept the
Sabbath, for which I determined to get him
out of my house. When I came down clean
for church, I used to see him working.

Are there not many honest men, who work
upon Sunday ? — ^Thcre may : but 1 was asked
my reason for not believing the man, and I
assign that as one among others.

At that time, you had no other reason ? — I
had.

Except what your wife told youf — "So,

You ^und your opinion upon what you
heard this day ? — Not by any means.

You can have no interest m this business ?
—No, indeed, for I have lost.

Bv this man ? — ^No, but by loss of time here.

Then the evidence you give is not founded
upon what he has said this day ?«-• No, I had
this opinion some months ago.
' How long did lie work upon the Sabbath
firom the time he came to lodge with you ? —
Occasionally.

How long had he remuned? — Seven, or
eight months.

And why did not you turn him out ? — I
could not because he paid his rent regularly.

Did he work from tne time he came ?— Oc-
casionally he did, and I gave him warning;
he took the lodgings for a year.

• But he did not stay a year ?«•- He did not,
but his furniture b there still, and his rooms
are locked, what can I do with them?

Did you speak well of this man, within this
month r — At to his pay, I might, and keeping
good hours.

Did you not speak well of him within these
nx weeks ?-^Not to my knowledge.

* Upon what occasion, did you say he kept
bis hours and paid his rent ?— I do not recol-
lect. There were many called to my house,
but I was not at home.

When did you first tell this, that he was not
to be believed on his oath?— I do not recol-
lect that I mentioned it to any one, except
sittins in court the former day.

Did you never converse respecting him, af-
ter hislwing arrested?— I do not know that I
did.

And yet it should seem very natural that
you should converse about it. When did you
first hear that he was a witness ? — I did not
hear it till after Weldon's trial.

Did you never hear of it till then f— I had
beard of it, but was not certain of it.

Did you not mention it then F-— No, I did
not like to mention it, because I thoueht it
rather disrepectfiil to myself to have had such
a<man in my house.

JficMu Clare 8wofiid--EiaiiiiiMd by Mr.

'Where do you Jive ?.-No. 39, Townsefli-
fttreet.

Trial qfihe Defenden^

[396

What business are you? — ^A tailor.

A master, or journeyman P — A master.

Do you know WiUiam Lawler .^— I do.

How long ? — ^About iburl^en months ; the
beginning of the winter 1794.

Have you ever had any conversation with
him about his principles of religion ?— In the
winter of 1794^ I belonged to the Telegraphie
society ; I was at it three or four times, and
there was a meeting at which they talked of
the Age of Reason by Paine, some recom-
mending it, others approving of it. Diwler
said, 1 20 farther than he does, for I deny a^y
part of the Trinity, either Father, Son, or
Holy Ghost

How long were you a member of that so-
ciety ? — I quitted it immediately upon seeing
there was a fellow of this opinion in it.

On your oath did you qmt it upon hearing
the opinions divulged by Lawler?—- On my
oath I did.

From the knowledge you have of his cha-
racter and opinions, do you consider him a
roan to be believed upon his oath, giving evi-
dence in a court of justice ? — ^I do not

Give }rour reason ?-7-I should. think a man^
who denied the three persons of the Trinity
ought not to be believed upon his oath.

Ificholai Clare eross-examioed by Mr. Samriit.

You were of that society ? — I was.

When did you quit it F — October or Novem-
ber 1794.

Lawler is a 'much younger man than you ?
— I do not know ; I am about SS years of age,.
and I do not know his.

Did you read that book ?— No.

Did you read any other ? — I did, and intend*
ed to make them a present of a dictionary-
of arts and sciences, I thought It such a.
society; but when I found he pronmleed such,
opinions and beine a leading man, I quitted
it, and was glad I did not g^ve my hooka
to them.

Was Burke a member? — There was a Mr..
Burke*

Was Galland there ?— I do not know him.

Had you any other acquaintance with Law-
ler than what arose from meeting him there f
—Never.

Francis Hammon swom^ — ^Examined bj Mr.

M'NaUy.

Do you know the prisoner 7—1 do.

What is his pneral character? — ^From the
time I knew him, a very industrious young
man ; « supporting a mother since I knew him
in September 1794.

Franeii Hammon ciots-examined by Mr. Kellt^

Where do you live ?— In lifiey-street.

Where did the prisoner live .>^In an apart-
ment under my lodgings.

He lived by shoe-makin£ ?— By making
shoes, and mending and cobung.

Where did be sleep?— Underneath where
I slept

387J

J(An Leargjbr Hyrh TreaMu

A. D. 1798.

[S8B

Mi^fal ho not fnffoeax dahs, whboat your
IcnowiDg it ?— He might. .
. Ave you a member of any ?— lam not.

He mi^ht have spent his nights out ? — He
might 1 took notice of him as a young man
40 Tery industrious^ and I used to remark,
that he surprised me, by being so Ions tied to
liis mother s apron string. He w orked at very
early hours in the mommg; I asked him why
he woiked early and late : he said, he could
not please every body afler all.

He mighi frequent clubi notwithstanding?
— ^He might.

[Here the evidence closed on the part of
the prisoner.]

George Cowan sworn.— Examined by Mr.
Attorney General.

Do you know Lawler ?— I do.

How long ? — Four or five years.

Is he a man to be. believed upon his oath
in a court of justice ? — I never heard of an
opinion to the contrary till this trial.

Do you recollect his going to you in Au-
gust last f — I do.

Tell the jury upon what occasion was that ?
— He came to roe on Monday mornmg, S3rd
or S4th of August, and seemed to be a good
deal a^tatedi He came into the parlour ; he
shut the door of the parlour, and tnen opoied
hia mind to me.

What intercourse had he with you before
that? — After his cominz from England, he
came to work with me ; he staid but a short
time, when he went to Gallagher's, South
Great George's- street, he work^ in hb (Gal-
lagher's) house and in his own lodgings. I do
not beheve he worked for any one else.

What passed when he shut the door ?«-He
told me that he wished to open his mind upon
a matter that concerned him very much ; tiiat
there was a conspiracy a^instthe Protestants
of this country, which lie wished to make
known for my advice, what to do. [Here Mr.
Cowan asked, was Lawler within hearing, and
beine answered in the negative, he proceeded]
Ue then told roe of the societies he had been
in. I do not recollect, that he mentioned the
London Corresponding, Sociefy. He men-
tioned tlie others, which he mentioned here.
I asked him was he sworn a Defender. He
told me he was a sworn Defender, and there
told me almost word for word as he has done
upon the table the two days he has been ex-
amined. Upon my word, he has adhered to
irhat he tola me very dosely in the two exa-
jninatioos.

Was there any one present ?— There was
not.

Could any one hear ?— There could not. -

Why not? — ^Because tliere was no person
present.

Wn the door shut ?— It was ; he shut it
himself.

Wimi advice did he ask? Did he make
any proposal?-^When he'^eard theProtes-

VOL. XXVL

tants were to be put to death, that lay very
heavy upon his mind (he was a Protestant
himself); in order to prevent the mischief, if
possible —

Did he speak of any intention he had with
regard to himself P^He did not.

Until now you never heard any tiling to
impeach his character? — ^Never.

Do vou know Ebbs?-^I do.

Had you ever any conversation with Ebbs?
— I had.

When ? — Shortly after Lawler was appre-
hended.

Upon that occasion, did Ebbs appear to
know that Lawler was charged with high
treason ? or that he was a witness ? — He ap-
peared to me to know, that he was charged
along with the rest.

How did Ebbs express himself of the man?
—-He represented him as a very honest, indus-
trious creature ; that he would pay his rent
the very day it became due : .that he and
his wife appeared extremely decent. I went
up to the room to look for him, before he was
taken up.

Ebbs did not impress you with any opinion
injurious to Lawler and his family?— No,
but the Reverse ; he told me, he was an honest
industrious roan, and never was more sur-
prised in his life.

George Cowan cross-examined by Mr*

M*N<dhf.

Ebbs said, he never was more surprised
than when Lawler was taken up as a De-
fender?— He did.

Did he tell you of any thing bad, which he
knew of Lawler ? — No. '

Did he then tell you of what he found in
the dirt-hole ?*-No.

If you had a lodger of whom you had a
good opinion, and that he lefl bags of balls
and slugs after him, would you not be sur-
prised ?— I must tell you farther. On Friday
la^t I saw Ebbs ; he came to me in our hall,
of which he is a free brother? he said he
wished to have the furniture taken away, as
he was afraid his house would be pulled down
by the mob. Neither at that time, nor until
this moment did I hear him say any thing
against the man.

The day of the conversation in the hall
was the day you returned yourself a common
council-man upon a minority of votes ? — It
was the day of the election.

That erection has been 'set aside ?— It has.

Would you not change an opinion of a
lodger, if you found ammunition after him ?-t
I might

Do you not think Ebbs had a right to
change his opinion ?-^No doubt but he might!

Do you- not think he was right?— Cer-
tainly.

When you spoke to Ebbs, did you say any
thing respecting religion ?— I did not.
. Thau tne character which Ebbs gave of
Lawler Was confined to the points of industry

S99f\ S6 GEOROfi itL

smi {iiiyinent of rehtf— It vrta. He nenr
imftntioned bis religion to ine.

Do 7oti not thime a lodging is tA ntttmrj
to a jogue. as . to an hunest man?— I l^fe-
Ueve so.

And therefore it is ntecesiai7^ fbr a rogue lo
liay iris tent to secure his lodging? — It is.

What Lawler told you was consistent with
^hat he told upon the table?— He has tbld a
little more here.

Nothing leas ?--No,

If a liian hid down a vlksk^ which he In-
tended to support by evidence, would it Dot
bccAr ib hiin^ as the first thing to be con^
ientP^Ittaaight.

Did ^ou never he^r of men being hanged
upon the coiisistent evidence of a conspiracy
to convict them for the purpose of procuring
rewards?— I never did hear of it

If you were of that malicious di^pp^itiony
would you not compose a train of lies tb sup-
port your stoiyf— I do notthitik it^sy to
support a train of lies.

But if a man gave inforniation of certain
facts before a magistrate, though that were
false, Would he not endieavour to Support it
before a jury? — He ought to do it, it they
were trutns.

When a ihah sweats to a lie in one place, it
is his object to make it appear as like it in
another f «— I cannot s^.

Do you not believe thatit man, who would
awear to one lie in one place, would swear
to another in another placed — I should sup-
pose so.

. If he told a lie before the magistrate,
^ould he not tell the same lie here?— I
think so.

If he contradicted his infot-matfons, would
be not be .liable to an indictment for peijury P
—No doubt of it.

If you hacl a good opinion of the consistency
of I^wler, why did you a^k was he within
hearing?— Ill tell you my reason, because I
should b^ happy to tell every thihg with re-
spect to the prisoner, as to Lawler. XaSvler^s
wife came to me and told xAe that Ebb's
wanted his rent; this was after Lkwier was
^prehehded. I desired Mrs. Lawler to tend
Ebbs to me, ahd I would ^tisi^ him. The
xeasoQ I did this was, that ]jaw|er should not
understand that any think was done for him
in consequence of any prose<:ution. I gave
inon^y to p^ Ebbs the rent, and Ebbs was
miid the nont, and he cbntiilued the Airni-
we ever since.

Then there have been pecuniary services
ibr Lawier's family ?— So (ar as that.

Qow are you to be re-irabursed,?— ^I could
not think of letting bim want after the in-
formation be gave me.

It was from motives of cbadty in your own
hunume breast, that you advanced the
money? — I did not say any such thmg.

Do you expect to be re-imbursedf— ;I 6q.
Do you expect Lawler will?— I do not
know but he will.

Trials o/ffk B^Mkn^ [Sl^

Bi Miftt nfeeins ^---IB^ Uft^liMihobA.

What do you ^xpect thilt be will be l«t lir
live in the city of Dab1la?-^I do not iee
i^hat is to hinder hitfn.

Then yon do not see sld ftr as I do. Ldwler
has other expectations ? — ^I believe not, be-
cause in the presence of Mr. Kemrais, he told'
me, he never expected any thing.

Do you not belieVe he is sicting in expect^'
tioh Of his miyesty's pi^on P — For wliat?

For his offences ? — ^1 do not know any thins^
oflbcta?

Do you not believe he expects a parddii f <— '
I do not believe it.

I ask you again ; if he be guilty of the
crimes, that he says he is, do you not believe
he expects a pardon ? Do you not believe h^
is guilty? — ^I believe he is, and I tell you
why. When l went to England, in 1792, 1
got an order to pay him a sum of mdniiev— «
10/. I went to look fbr him, and feund he
had thanged his name : he came to me ia
the evenmg after, vid told me he had
enlisted, which was the cause of chadging hb
name ; and I went afterwards to the Mne
place, and the woman told me, there had beeil
a party of soldiers looking for him.

You had 10/. to advance him ? — ^I had.

This was m London?— It was.

You knew him there ?— I did.

By virtue of your oath^ do you know Whkt
brought him back ? — ^No.

Ybu never encouraged him ?— No.

Yon employed him upon his return?— I
dM.

He went to yoti to his best fHend ?^He
wdis girJ to work with me, as I have some of
tiie best workmen from England.

But H)K staid a short time ?— Gallaghet in^
i'ejgted'him from me.

What Was the 10/. ?— George VhilJ %aa
guardian of this boy and another, tod wall
6\¥ner of certain rents. There was 50/. a-
piece coming to the boys ; and 40/. had beett
paid to this man, and 10/. remained dne.
Drurv reauested I would pay him in Lbndbfa^
which I aid.

If Lawler, or any other person htA toU yoi>
he did not believe in a God, and iifteHvard$
told you he had been guilty of tlie otenatek he
mentioned here, womd yon consider him i^
be a man to be believed in a court of jus^r
—I never heard any thing ag&inst imn until
this trial.

Do you consider that to be an answer t^
hif question f Why do you etade it ?^WNsil

is It.

If a man told you, he disbelieved ^^tl^
persons of the Trinity, and ebnft^sM Hhe
crimes this man has told, would you ta)ce ifiA
to be a man, who oug^t to be lielievcJd'Dpoii
his oath ?— I must conVbs h womd aftiake my
credit of him. Upon getting the informttlA
I did I thougfht It my dn^^to. mysdf, ^miF
country, and my king, tokl goveri^»tt|lfw
acquamtedwithit

H12

JoinJ^WTfJbr Higk Tnason.

A. p. J79^-

1312

{Hciv the e«d0Boe dpsed.]

Mr. Barop Georg^.^^r, M*NftlIy,' as you
^re tbe single coutisej fox |he pri^o^ei', ytfi
«r^ at liberty to observe ppon the evidence if
^ou choose, in additiojD to what |you have al-
feady awied.

Mr. \fi'iVii%.— My Lords, I f^l myaejf
;pauch iodebtedto vbur lordslups. J "wilf jiist
make ooe ubservalion, which I oipittje^ ^
'ff}f^ — lo ^I jthje. evidence a^inst the prisoner
with respect ^conversations ^etweexi Mii|n
iaiidXitkwIer, tbf?yare always stated .i^Hhoyt
^!e in^rv^ntion of a ,t£^r^ p^rj5on--7^ ^le
.QonvfirsatioD in ^lacKhor^-lane was private
—without tbe ll^rjiyity of a tnir4 p^rspp. jyho
tio^d disprove tf\e stat^^^t. This f'l^e
coly xeBmk I wish to ^ke, j^ I will (iot

, ybo IS to reply .
sfKp Jtl^ jury tak^ jEK)tes ^the evidence up^
vhich !lbey will dc^ide^ .^o^t upqn tlie argtj-
.ments of co^^sel. T^e jyjry are tj|^e^Ud£e,8 pf
tb^ life and deatb pf^s unfortunate prisoner
^-chargea witih ^a ' offei^iGe ' of prodigious
weight;

Mr. SolicUor Gtn^rfll spoke tP ejvideoce, on
the part of ^e crown. He Jsaid, tbat jlne
.marked attention of Uie iury, ayring the .pro-
.ff9SB of the trial, and tbe laborious and'apxious
situation in which their lordships had .been
placed, during tbe course of the longest session
of Oyer and-Tenain^r, that had'been remem-
.b^redip Iceland, iyo«dd rend^ hip^ ui^sti-
^fiable^ were be pot tp rCpodense his observa-
,tioi^8, uritUn as narrow a comAa^sjas ppissible.
lie said, that it y^ould be bis ^u^ ,to in^i;€i9s
Uto ppints upon the mii^ds pf the jniy. te^
jTbat.the existence ^ of a .treason, such as was
,cbfrg9d in the indictment, had been cqU-
bliabed heybnd .con^ove^y. Sadl^, Tbjit
^tl^ere :yvas sufficiei]\t eyiden^e to cpnvince
every reasonable iaao» y^^t tbe crime 3!^^
hroueht home to the,prisoner at the bar. As
.to 1l^ first .poipty it was a h^ipeptable, apd
notorious truth, which ll^e evidence cpiii-
(firmed* not only by parol proof, b^t by writt^
,dpc|iment8, found upon tbe associates of tlte
Ipiiboner, wA iK^^ i^Uempted to he cbntrp-
.yertedf tl^t this rank anil foul treason has
not only ^sied^^but bad.^r^t fqrt,h jfito ac^U
.jbf mo9l alarming outrage tl^rougb.mapy p'^ris
of the' kingdom ; and upon the prespnt occa,-
ajon, we trace it upder its various and myste-
rious modifications $o have had. the same
^actuating ^contagious principlie, ^hich has
diffused itself from France throu^ those se-
minaries of political mischief ,and dl^ase,
f which und^r tne appellation of societies, clubs,
committees, and vef<?nders. Urged oii by
'French missionaries, have inf(^qted .and .(^n-
^^aogered both Great Biitain and Ireland, '

As to the rules of law, siaid be, matured ^s

fl)iey are by a series of judicial determinations'.

in the various cases which have been ^d-

i^tfi^ pi^ ^ ' suluibct of. Uem^9 ^ ,ii^e

Stat 1?9 £d.. 3rd, w)iatyoi^ ^ntlemen, haye
heard froifA my learnt friend Ihe attorney
geperal, and what you will hear from i^e
wisdom and authbriiy of the Court, render it
unnecessa^ for me to detain you upon that
part of the case. The meeting, as>sociatingy
consulting, and confederating with a body pf
men, leagued and united unj£r the obligati9n
of a deliberate oath, to be true to the ^ench
Convention, apd to assist the forces of tj^e
French (at open War with the state) with an
^med confederacy, incase they should i^va^e
the k:ipgdoB^ ; the enlisting of men intot^e
cobspiracy, and , the pightly arrangements wr
numbering and giving officers and discipline
tpth^' bpdyy the ^bscribing nionev id piir-
tha^i^ ammvpiitipn, die pliinderioe (pe'peace-
]b)e ^nhabita!h^ of thie oo.untr^ of their arms,
for th,e ayowe^ pi^rpose of siving assistance to
jthe invaders, a^Ont' in wemselves to a df-
teci invijt^tion, and eiAopi^ragen^ent to the
^nemy jto' invade ^ese, nis ms^esty^s rea^s ;
and ajre plajin'overt acts of the treason in the
two cpvmfs of Jlh^e mdlctment^ namely, iHe
co^pas^ipg of .Ihe king^s deatlji and the ad-
hering to his enemies. Now in the body of
evidence brought to substantiate the charge,
th^f e is oile prominent feature, which arises
out of ,the oath aiid catechism, which I coi^-
sider together, ^ if they were'one instrument,
each part throwing tight on the other, and to
which I call the particular attention of tl^e
jwy.; as.froip the internal and immutable evi-
dence Rising from that instrumep^t, from Uie
nianp^r in yvnich it appears to combine the
principles of the confederacy, from the au-
thenticity which it has received, noit onlpr
.frpm the circumstantial evidence by which U
was ideptified, .but by which it was traced ip
the fob of.t%t associated Defender, on whoip
|t ylrfis found, tijraid of the information '^f
Ithe principal witness, Lawl^r. It consti-
tutps.a most important branch nf the casp,
not only as an tp^efrags^ble proof of the trea-
son winch teems through every line of it, hiit
also that from ^e previous description given
'.by lawler of its contepts, and of this .person
.upo^ whom it was ' found, there' is the
strong^t degree of conx>borating ^credjt
'j^ven to the whole testimony of that witness.
' Of the instructions, and signals^ which , ac-
.•9qn\paQiedt(iat. initiating, that ceremony^ of
^j^Wej^rin^, you have had a mibpte descriptioq,
and XiB>.wler has proved that the prisoner wa|^
' weU.acquainted with .those mysterious 'signals.
He has also told you, , that the ^first meeting
of Defenders^ at which he saw the prisoner,
was at $toney-haUer,'and that he, the pri-
soner then apppared to him then to be some-
what in liquor. And -here in conformity to
those principles of , moderation a.nd upright
candour which have distinguished the con-
ductor pf the present prosecutions, I am free
to acknowledge,* that the prisoner's being
somewhat in Iiquor^'is apart of the evidence
from which 1 ought hot to draw your atten-
tiox^ and jropi iu&; i^^f^ner of saying it« Tbe

SiS] S6 GEORGE lU.

witnessy in mentioning that fact, shows that
his mind Is divested of any malevolence to-
wards the prisoner. I will say, however, that
if inebriety were to be an excuse for outrage,
there would be 99 atrocious criminals in 100
of the lower order of the pneople of Ireland, who
in truth, mieht plead it in oar of their being
I convicted. Tnat intoxicating drug which is so
unhappily and universally made use of in this
country, is the constant preparatory to every
' thiog that is desperate, amongst those, who
' may not be sufficiently susceptible of being
' inflamed by the writings of the illustrious
Thomas Pame, whose doctrines an ingenious
roan has aptly called, the whiskey of infidelity
and treason. At that meeting at Stone^-
' batter, which I have mentioned, Hart, who is
' proved to have been invested with the autho-
' rity of a committee-man, in the presence of
[ the whole company, expostulated with a per-
son who was just introduced, and appeared
reluctant to be sworn, and who desired to
know what was the object of the engagement,
' to which Hart replied, in a loud voice: •* T!ie
object it, to take arms from thote that have
them, that toe may assist the French when they
land** And at the same meeting, Hart com-
' manded all present, to lay their hands upon
the table, and to engage on the virtue of their
' Defender oath to attend on a future evening,
that they might proceed to plunder a house
of arms.

Upon a subsequent interview between the
[witness and the prisoner; he, the prisoner,
'relates the circumstances of a robbery that
was committed by him, accompanied by Hart
and others, pursuant to their engagements ;
and the manner of breaking the house, the
'taking of arms of a particular description, the
ringing of a bell, during the robbery, by some
person within, and the exart geographical si-
tuation of the house, are all relatcKl by the
witness, from the account the prisoner gave
him. And the owner of the house that was
robbed has been examined, and has confirmed
that account in most of the essential points :
as to the arms taken, the bell ringing, the
site of the house, and the particular time and
manner of the robbery, ^o as to leave no room
to doubt of the prisoner being involved in tho
. transaction.

The witness, Lawler, has undergone the
most sifUng scrutiny of examination for two
days, in the course of this and a former trial.
That he was to hav6 been a principal witness,
has been publicly known, and the course of
the cross-examination, and the evidence ad-
duced by the prisoner, show to demonstra-
tion, that the prisoner's counsel have been
thoroughly aware and instructed of the evi-
dence tor the crown, bradched out as it has
been into such a variety of place, time and
circumstance. It is next to an impossibility,
that any fabricated tale of transactions so re-
cent, involving so many persons, and the se-
ries of so many facts, could have escaped de«
tectioH; or that any thing but consistent troth

Tridti of the tiefenderi^

[344

could have supported itself, without a contra-
diction, either from the witness himself or
from some other quarter. But nothing of
that kind has been attempted or argued. It
has been indeed attempted to show, nowever,
that the witness is divested of alt sense of
religion ; that he has been involved in many
crimes, and that as he is an accomplice in the
crime, which he now proves against another,
he deserves no credit himself. Of the three
witnesses, who have been called by the pri-
soner, the two first, after swearing to the ir-
religious sentiments of the witness, have ac-
knowledged that the^ themselves continued
long in the same pohtical societies with the
witness, who had come recommended from
the London Corresponding Society, a philan-
thropic admirer of that same Thomas Paine
whose works were their principal stud]^, and
you, gentlemen of the jurv, are the best judges
which of the witnesses have been the most
pious of his disciples. But this, you cannot
forget, that afler the time when Lawler was
supposed to be arrested, those two witnesses
inquired for him, with the utmost solicitude
of regard and friendship for their 9ld asso-
ciate. But, Lawler afterwards became a pe-
nitent and witness for the crown ! — Whilst
he was an unreclaimed criminal, he was their
firiend; but when, by his discovery, he
made atonement, he is infamous in their
eyes,

Et hinc ilU lachryma*

Whilst he was a Defender, he was virtuous
and a roan of truth ; but now he has revolted
from them, and is an infidel. As for the third
witness for the prisoner, it has been proved,
that under the same impression as the other
two, when first resorted to, and asked for the
witness's character, he then represented him
as a roost honest and industrious creature.
This appears, from the evidence of Mr. Cowan
who was called to the credit of the witness,
Lawler, afler his credit had been thus im-
peached ; for it is remarkable, that this is the
only defence that has been attempted. Gen-
tlemen, you have all heard Mr. Cowan, and
you know him, and if any thing could raise a
roan of his known worth in estimation and
nierit amongst his countrymen, it would be
his conduct on the present occasion. Mr.
Cowan has told you of the sedulous industry
of Lawler, who worked for him at his trade.
He has told you of the voluntary disclosure
made by him, at a time when there was not a
shadow of accusation against him. He has
mentioned to vou his motives of conscientious
remorse, and Ris horror of intended massacre,
and he says, that he has been uniform and
consistent firom the first moment of his dis-
covery ; and as an instance of his present sen-
timents of Lawler, he has said that he (Cowan)
would employ him hereafter at his trade.

But the learned counsel tlien interrogated
t n a t€ne of some significance. — ''What, sir,
do you think that lawler will be let to live

345]

John Ltaryjitr High Trtaton.

A. D. 1795.

[346

inDublin.** **If«o,** Mjrs the counsel, "I
think I can see farther than you do.** Good
God ! can any advocate be so hardy as to in-
ainuate ttiat a witness who comes forward in
aid of public justice, mast do it at the risk of
bis life ? Are we come to this } Is terror to
l>e hung out to prevent the investigation of
' truth ? And will any man dare, in the face of
this tribunal, to raise such a suggestion ?

{Here the Court observed, that Mr. M'Nally
was not in court, which they regvetted, for
though the expresaioiis made use of by him,
bad not excited the same ideas in their
minds as in that of the solicitor general,
yet from the sense that might be put on

- - theoi, it was necmary the words should be
explained.]

Mr. Solicitor General, — I did not perceive
that the learned gentleman had gjone out since
I began. I ask pardon for mentioning, in his
absence, what I nad rather be was present to
explain.*

It has been argued, that as this case must
\ turn upon the evidence of the single witness,
who is an accomplice in the crimes of which
he accuses others, that no jury should credit
him, and that no Court should sanction a con-
viction upon his evidence. I am well aware
that such an opinion was formerly contended
' for, and that even the competence of such a
witness has been strenuously argued against.
But since the case of Chamockif who was
tried soon afler the Revolution, before as
great judges as ever sat in Westminster*hall,
' DO attempt has been made to support such an
opinion, and capital convictions upon the evi-
dence of a single accomplice have, in some
late instances, been sanctioned by all the
judges of England as reported bv Leach. If
It were not so, many dark ana dangerous
crimes would go unpunished ; for the perpe-
trators of dark crimes are seldom known by
any but the accomplices ; and more so in this
. country than any other, where nocturnal out-
rage has become familiar, and where convic-
tions in most instances could never be had
' through an^ other means than the discoveiy
of accomplices. And although ^dictum to
the contrary of the opinion which 1 maintain
' may have derived new force by what has lately
fallen from an authority which every man
roust venerate, I will take the freedom to say,
that upon principles as sound and as j[ust as
ever have beenaaopted in the law of evidence,

• ** Mr. M^Nally had left court for the pur-
pose of taking some refreshment, and upon
his return, bemg informed of what had passed,
explauned, and said, his meaning was that l^w-
ler would be so covered with infamy, that no
person in Dublin would employ him, and
therefore he must seek his bread elsewhere.
This explanation was deemed amply suffi-
cient by the Court, and the matter terminated
to the satisfaction of all parties.*'— Ortg* EdU,

t iinre \'ol. XII. p. 1377.

and tb< investigation of truth, that ajuiy majr
be well warranted to find a verdict, and judges
well warranted to sanction a conviction, even
upon the evidence of a single accomphcc.

But this is not a case resting upon tlie evi-
dence of a single accomplice ; for exclusive of
the intrinsic weight, and consistency of his
evidence, here is a number of collateral, cor-
roborative facts, arising from the testimony of
others, as to the finding the oath in the fob
of Kennedy, where I^wler had previously
told it to be — the unifonn relation of the facts
to James and Cowan, and the detail of the
robbery of Finegan's house, of the arms.

Besides that, no general and unqualified re-
mark can attach upon the credibility of all
accomplices. There are various gradations '
and shades of criminality, that might tend to
discredit, but neither the laws of God nor maa
preclude the hope of exculpation by repen-
tance, towards which^ a fair, yoluntaiy, and
explicit disclosure of^his guilt is the first step
to fiiin credit and reception to the penitent.
And see how much more strongly this argu-
ment will hold in cases of treason than any
other. It is of the peculiar essence of that
crime, that the intention of the mind, mani-
fested by overt acts, indicative of the inten-
tion; shall be a completion of the guilt. . But
evil ^ into the mina of man may come and
go.'' And no one of sound sense will say,
that the man whose deluded mind had been
betrayed into such overt acts, who took an
early opportunity to revolt from his associates,
before they accomplbhed their horrid pur-
pose, and fi-om a principle of remorse disclosed
and prevented the completion of the mischief
shall in point of moral turpitude be deemed as
infiunous as the man wno comes with bis
bloody hands to relate the murder which he
had assisted others to commit.

There is one other striking feature of this
case, which in my opinion, goes stronely to
set up the credit of Iiawler, and to attach cri-
minality upon the prisoner and his associates.
For it appears, that the instructions from
whence the cross-examination has been fur-
nished, could not have been derived from any
other source, but a direct and intimate privi^
and participation in all that criminality which
is imputed to the witness. Thus we have it
from the cross-examination, that Paine's A^
of Reason was the vade tnecum of the socie-
ties : — ^That the witness was the person best
armed at the watch-house and at Stoney 'bat-
ter:— from the cross-examination you have
it, that the witness was employed by i> Blanc,
the Frenchman, who has appeared a princi-
pal actor amongst the Defenders, as well as
leader in a conspiracy to put Cockayne out of
the way before JacKSon*s trial. Who is it
that has heard what this cross-examination
has brought out who does not believe the men
in the dock were privy to the whole, and who
does not stand appafied at the horrid woiic
that midnight treason has been hatching f—
And who- xs it that has heard the learned

di7] S6 GEORGE lU.

.ISNitisel asV auch quMtipus from theseorel ,^ .
iiHet of his instructions, who is not convinced
that privitjr and participation have furnished
those examinations, ana linked traitors tog^
th^ through every stage from that society, in
which Lawler*s mmd was first corrupted, down
to the Ipwest Defender that has heen the de^
jperate instrument to carry into efibct the most
jilanning system of assassination^ treasou, and
rehelUon.

These, gentlemflo, aie circumstaocefl^ which
from their nature, could never have been re-
vealed by any man who had not shared io
their criminaliiy; and beio\^ brougttt out by
the prisoner, by their collision, they throfv a
3'^bt upoa the whole, and flash convictiop
Vip»n 4he mind of eveiry man who heard them.

And now, gentlemeBygivejne leave tp con-
gratulate you and the country in which we
uve, however painful this inquiry has heen,
^hat aAer the irrefragable pioof which we ;aow
luveofthe co^erattonof French fiVfiakm^-
vies, with the prpmotAng of treason j^n/^ a^i-
tion at home, there yet remains that &ir a^d
jmpartialappeal to justice, which the p riso-
jDQr,i>r those who have involved him, ^ould
not find in any part of the world, ,th|it is nq|
hless^ by the British constitutioa-^tbat con-
jBtitutioni which they have endjcavoured to (fe-
^trpy.

In lOider to aeaaie the deludedfirom Iheur
jCuik by timely exaqiple— in order to a^ve os
Jrom the degrading supplioatiqn to mtlits^
justtce^in order to save us fintm th^ hoc-
Tid butcheries which have delMged 9o great ^
mroportion pf £urope in bloodk— I trust^.tbf^t
Ijr a conscientious discharge or^ypur duty, you
will give your (Country cause to look qp with
Teneration to the trial.by jury.

Mr.Baron Geor^e.^-'GcnUemeaQftbAJuiiy ;
— Tlie prisoner is mdicted for hijgh.treadofi, in
.compassing the death of the kiqg, and ad-
iiering to the lung's enemies. The treason ip
adhermgto the king'senemies is that to which,
In .my humble opinion, you ought to apply the
.evidence you .have beard. By so doing, jou
will avoid every thing that would embarrass
^oujn doiiig justice in thiacase. Gendemeo,
,the indictment states, that a public war ex-
isted between the king, and the. persons .cul-
^rcisiqg the.government of France : it chara^
4he piisonerwith adhering to those enemies
of the king, audit seto out what are oaM
4>vertactB, which are necessary to be proved,
in order to substantiate the cliarge. Qentle-
.men, I shall point your attention to one of
these, in order that you may apply the evi-
dence as I repeat it firom my notes. It charges
tthe prisoner with this, that be did join, unite,
and associate himself with divers, other false
itraitors, luid with them did enter into, iuofd
.become one of a par^ .formed undfr the de-
inomination of Defenders, for the purpose of
/adhering to the persons exercising the go-
.vemment in France, in case ^y should m-
Tade ttiis kingdom. Thereibie» in my appre-
i^wosioo, you ought to direct your .4i€B)ion

qfike Df/bukr$^-^

(348

to ascertain this Cact to ypur sfitis%IIoq, rhp-
ther the prisooef' did titiite hipMlf with De-
fendersi for the purpose of adbenng io the
persons exercising the government pfFrance,
and assisting )hpfP^ in qise they shoMid invade
Ireland.

The principal part pf fhfi evidence and the
proofs, in this oas^ dep^s upon the iest,^
mony gf William Lawlei-. Th^ tQps% j^terif I
consideration, in truth, that arises in thts case,
is, wliether any and wluft credit is dae to tlje
teatfanomr of timt nHMi?---iFor if Ibe teslinony
he has giveo, ahaU lie Mieped to be tnith, I
sagr, tf that shall appear to bo the fact(but
ooncemiiur wbieb, I and the rest of the Court
will c^renuiy avoid intiiMCMigany opinion of
our own) «n my «p(>i;Bh«MkNi,lhe pceeeal in*
dictment will be proved against the .priaQncr,
and ypn ypil Jfte bot^pd to find hi^i guilty.
But, ^epUemen, tbadqertun what Q^et-^f
credit 19 due to him, it Is the du^r of Ipe
Coprt to.app;riseyo.vi of the .legal objecliona
to his credit. For (under the circn^istance^)
iifi is ^.opmpoienlt Fitness; btft it is pur^uty
to put you in pos^e^iop pf those lobjecitions to
his cn^it, a^ wl^ch you will be better ah|e
.to estimate iht wemht of his testimony.

Qentlenien, the lair i' ^lear, that j^ ,m^
wjbo ii an ^n^el, i^d w,ho has i\9 sense pf
.|i«iy reUgjofc not ^Ueiringln a futu^f taf|e,of
rewards ana pun%m^Ql8, wpiUd Apt be a
f;ppy)etent witness jin f ooint of iustice. A
jpian having as^ ^p^ie^ pi xeUgfon must ho
JWQ01 accotdine to Vt^ eeiempnies of pi» reli-
gion; bitt tne ^.oouftKlers it a farcp to ad-
minister ap, path ip a ,|i^ ibbt h<{lieving i^
God apd a future stato. There is apo;thc^ ob-
iectiop to the ootopetot^cy of a witness, if be
be rendered i^iamPU9 by .the,iuqgnieniof ai^
<^urt competent.to convict bito* ^f^ witpets
be .(^pnvicted by the ju4gn)ent of ,f .<;oort of
treason or telopy. .or any j^caJadalpuys offencf ,
^spchas neijury; lie is held;lgr t|iB Ifw of the
land to be an .incompetent wilness, .and such
a map isnoteventobel^eardby ajmy. — ^A
witness also is ipcompetont, who is.personalur
interested in aigr ca|se m which )ie is produced.
.Apd therefore, where thisinto^t consists, m
pecuniary considecation, or of any other kiod,
such 113 pardon for.pffences, it is a fit subjoQt
for the' jury to cpn^der.— In\a civil t^i^f,
clearly, if a.^itness he ipter^sted, .be gmnpt
be e^apiioed. But iu.cnmif)iJ,cases, for t^e
figie^ of the public, getting rewards dpes nqt
in a cpurt of criming jutisoiictipn, disable hiip
from giving testimony; though it may go to
his credit Gentlemep, Hnd^ these circum-
.Mances, it .is for youito consider, wh^ the
whole weight of :tiie trial rests, in a gpaX do-

eit upon the testimppy of one wi^lg|s, how
, the fear or Ood has made him tofi truth;
; to consider his moral chafacltr,and liowjmidt
he legaids the ipnncipks of so^ie^^pod the
sapctipn of the laws, |nfiic^ng punishmeiit
' for pqjury . xoa are aiso, to consider,, whet^r
|he. person has ai^ .weighty interest to gjife
evidence which ,fi^> ymiot bpi^ to iftarp

sin

John Uavjfjblr Sigh Tnaian.

A. D. 1795.

[ss(r

fMm tlM tkrik. If «M teUe^e tMs wiftiMte
fafld not toywiaiiyfattf ratMnif Hmt Im is
of loikitioiis twitbd cmit^itelKmy itil6fMted
in the e«ieat of ttie tajM^ then cerkiinly bb
tflsUinofiy whkh be gtvto am only N SU)>-
portod ^7 ilb oim inttindlc weighty b^ coA-
aiticiiev itt ilMlf. A wHnen nimriAg uad^ r
m 4iHliillty fromptrMiuil ^hArx^Mv ctn only
dtftvoctcdit fWMA ft long detaH of fods, well
and probably tomatttta* Ther«fera, geotte-
mitif iff fepeaiing the evideiko ovet to you,
IdiMAm thb obs^nrttioAy tn oitter thai, as I
go eluiiffi you 'may dir^ol yotttr attentidii ac-
conNAgly, and taa whatbor there be atty ek-
cumstaoces, which carry along whh tbeio kir
trinBic cofivMoii. which willMttis^ yoa, of
thto ttulh. No doabt, getaikmtm^ th««idst
aatklactory evidetice is, wltere ite lee a nto
cf relfgiois hatmg ah ttprlghtopiaion of Ood,
giving a clear andconneeted aoceimt of any
tianactionfe OeHUemeta, yoy are to deMr-
nmie, whether in the evidence which has been
gmn, any eneh ^ittumalances are to be found,
and upon the i^hote mattery aeeovding to
your oonsdenceiii and the best of yoor ^dg-
inents to find the truth. The Ibwallows the
teeiiiiioiiyofia tnan te be heud hi a court of
juMke» under particular ciromuianceay twtn
after he is detected In hie own criraesy and is
apprehended for thein» and when, conse-
quently, he is giving teatimony to save hito-
self tod accuse dth^rs. But the condition of
a man is at taasi ene d^gf«e short of that,
when he comes feriFard lo give evideneei be-
fore he is suspected, dr dSirged, oraocused
of those oflbnces trhlcb he pn^e^; ^ho Vo-
luntarily comes forward, and appears ata ti*ie
when he miehi make his e««iip^» he rather fe-
naans and gBres evidence voluntarily to scdiise
olheie. Gentlemen, upon the -whole df the
case, you are to obnsiderthe motives trhichtta-
Uneneed thd man in his testiilMmy,and'O0uple
tiiem with the rest of the evidehos, aqdcdn-
sider under all the elrcumslanees^ vrheiher ybu
do, or do net doubt the trmh of hbrehitioti ;
because if you doubt the truth of the rektien,
yott are bound to acquit the prisoner.

Gentlemen, the evidence of LewJcr was^^
fHerehislDrdshfipreadthe#boleevidenceftom
MS notes^-end then proceeded}— Mr. Cowan
would have been as bad as any of the PAity,
if he concealed the information which ne re-
ceived; it would be against the oath of his alle-
glanoe. If a man b^omeeacoumntedby any
means with tteatonaMe practices, end takes
BO part, it will be ti mwprision. But in a
marter of a corpoi^tiDn, it would bis n peijury,
net to make it known. How toukl'any man
live in society, who had ceneeAled matters of
this kind, whiA, if well-feundtd and not
ctiedied, lends to let kxmeall ranks of men
iqMm Me another >

Tills, gentiefnen. is the whole evidence :
which! Save slated in the raittote manner I
did, after the ebservatioo I male to ^eu, that
you ihight see," whether it ctuviesccmvittkm
toyourmiinia. llMitaMiiViiiiiiMUwhkh

ytft muM And^ befoie yea can convict the^
piiMner. This indictment statss and ia
truth the prosecirtion is founded upon that
fact^that mere is b party of men associated
in this kingdom unoer the denomination of
IMenderSi for the purposes and with desi^s*
to assist, and adhere to the kion's enemies,
in case Ihey should invade Ireland. It is ne-
cessary for you, gentlemen, in order m a»-.
oenain« whether oecoming a Defender be
treaion, or a lesser oflencsi to know what th»
object of these men is, in becoming Defenders^
Tbeh' object is discovered by their oatli, tfieir
deelstation and catechism, and the acts
whicii thl^ do.«^As to the oath which yo»
haif*e heard, you must observe that the per-
sons 6#om upon that oath, who owe to their
king allegiance during the joint lives of them--
selves and the king, qualify their allegiance*
to the king, wkiki th^ Uve under tkt govern-
ment .-—qualifying their alle^ance, having in:
oontdmplation a subversion of the kmg's go^
vemment. The person taking the oath swears
to be true mUkt he iivet mnder themaemment^
presuming that something will be done to
abridge that govomment.-^He s«rears to bo
true fo committees, superiors, eemmandera
and officers— Who are tnese ? It is for you
to say to what the words should refor Are
they persons holding superiority under thn
king, or against the govemmevt of the coun^
trvN^Are these men commanders of thw
king*s army, bearing the king^s commission^
or are they such ashas been mentioned, wheit
one of the party required to know the number
of Defenders, that officers maghff be appoihted^
The party is sworn to obey in all lawful pro*.
ceedlDgs*^To what does that refer?— He ia
sworn to be obedient to the laws made by the
cmrnktee^li that according to the hiws of the
land— or« their own coamiittee?

Gentlemen, it is fair, in my humble appre^
hension, that you should consider the import
of these two pnipers together. The other in«
strument, which is a sort of catechism, be*

fins'iu this way-^** I am concerned— So am
.—With whom ?— The National Convention \
meaning the Convention of France— '^ WhaM
it your designs ?— to dethrone all — gs '*—
the innuendo is to dethrone all kingt^^Yoii
are to judge, whetlier that innuendo be true.
If the designs of these Defenders are, that they
are concerned with the National Convention
of France, that their desians are, to quell all
nations, and dethrone all kings— if you eouple'
the papers toeether and consider those to be
the design»of Defenders, you ars to consider,
whether they nre treason or not P What are
their aetsf-^It was proposed, that arms
shouki be taken from the houses to aid the
Frenth, when they should come— Whether
Leaiy was there at the time the proposal waa
made, or at what particniar time he was there
does not appear; but he told Lawler, he waa
out that mgbt ; and you are to consider whe-
ther that was a common fokmv or bnrghtry,
or done with an intent to take aims to vam

SSI]

S6 GBOllGE IIL

TrMf ^tte Defimdett-^

itag

Ibem as these, people should tbiak it, when
the country would be invaded. Persons col-
lecting arms in this manner cannot be other-
wise than adhering to the king's enemies.
For what is so likely to incite invaders to
come here, as to know, they will iind asabi*
ance upon their coming.
■ Gentlemen, I have stated these thinss to
you and will conclude now by saying, that if
you believe Lawler, this indictment is proved
against the prisoner. And if it shall, when he
U charged upon an overt act of having become
a Defender associated for these purposes, it
will be a clear declaration to the nubile what
tia^ object of this society must be. Every
man acting in concert witli traitors, or assist-
ing them before or ailcr the act, is a prin-
ci^ traitor, for in treason there are no ac-
cessaries. Any sort of aid, or encouragement,
that will make a man an accessarv before or
after in any other offence, will make a man a
principal traitor in treason ; and therefore you
will consider, whether it miakes any difference
in the degree of guilt, that one appears to
take a leading part, and another, one of his
followers in the mischief— What ii^jury could
any traitor do, if he had not followers to as-
sist him.

Gentlemen, if you find upon the whole of
the case, inferences from the evidence of the
fatts stated, amounting to such a conviction
Wought home to your minds, as leaves no
doubt, but that the prisoner is one of the per-
sons called Defenders, and that their objects^
are treasonable you are bound to find him
guilty. But if tmder all the circumstances
you should have any doubt, such as reasonable
sien may . entertain, consistently with their
consciences and their duty to their country,
you will not consider the consequences what-
ever they may be, but find the truth, and ac-
quit the man.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain, — Gentlemen of
the juiy ; It does not occur to me, that I can
add any thing to what you have heard.

Mr. Justice JVaacane.— Gentlemen ; I do
not think I can add to it.

The Jury retired for one hour, and brought
in a verdict.— ^ot Guilty.

[^Wednesday, December SO,

. Clayton and Cooke were brought up to be
tried, when Mr. A ttorney^- general moved
to postpone their trials; it had appeared
upon the former trials, said he. that there
are persons wicked enough to take away the
lives of witnesses. One of the witnesses
who was to prosecute those prisoners does
not attend, and Mr. Cowan, another wit-
ness, has been attacked with the gout in
his stomach, and cannot attend.

Mr. Af< Aa(/j^.— I have a doubt how far
the Court has any discretion, under the
Uabeas Corpus act, to postpone these trials.

.Mr. Jitorw^ Generalf-rl admit| that if

t

no iodktment be fomd Ihe first MasioBr
after committal, the prisoner must be dis*
charged ; and if one be found, and he i»
not tried the second session* he is to be
dischaived. But the act is silent as to the
right o? being tried. Then, my lords, I •
leave it to your discretion. Upon the H»*
beas Corpus act, the right of trial remaina
as before. The prisoners m^y be discharged. .
but they are still liable to be tried. '

Omri. — If the prisoners presented peti-
tions upon the first day of the sessioo after
their committal, and are not tried on the
second commission, they are entitled to he .
discharged.

Mr. Jitornev General^ then addressed the .
Court^ and tne by-staoders, in order to
have It fiilly understood by the prisoners
and the public, that though the persons
now in custody should be £scharged from
imprisonment^ yet the prosecution was by
no means given up, but would on Uie oo&-
trary remain in full vigour and be carried on
as soon as the king's witnesses should be
forth-coming.— He then descanted on the
causes of those enormities which had
brought the peace of the city and country,
the property and lives of the public, into
the verv imminent danger in which they
had so lately been, and from which he hoped
that the proceedings of this commission
would secure them. — Those evils he attri*>
buted to the very relaxed state of morality
—the extreme and culpable inattention of
masters and fathers of nmilies to the man*
ners and conduct of their children, and t»
the ^vi?ine and alarming prevalence of ir-
religion and infidelity, which wherever they
became general, destroy public happioesa
and public safety, and loosen all the bonds
which hold society together.

As one instance of culpable nciglect in
the public to the morals of the rising gene-
ration, he mentioned the conduct of thos^
many masters who. are become too proud ta
let their apprentices sleep in their houses.
— It was a known fact, he said, that ap-
prentices now were generally sent to lodge
m other houses tlian their masters, and in
that profession with which he was most
nearly connected, that of an attorney, there
'. were only two men in the city of Dublin
who kept their apprentices in their own
houses. The natural conseouence of this
was, that boys at a very early age became
fit subjects of those wicked men to work
on, whose olyect was, to remove every reli-
gious and moral principle from the mind in
order to make way for those abominable
doctrines which they wished to inculcate.—
He was not yet become a very old roan, and
yet he was old enough to remember a tioio
when fathers and masters kept their chil-
dren and apprentices at home^ and taught
them to pass their vacant evemngs in some
innocent amustmfent — now the evenings
and the Si^bbath were devoted to clu^s mi

Thonm Keimedj^Jhr Hijgk Tnason.

•ocMes, where folly was taught to hatch
treason; and imbecilitj to plot massacre.-^
Topreirenl efiectually these dreadful crimes,
wbieh it was now fiilly proved had been at-
tenpiedy the public must exert tbeir own
powexs— -the master and the father must
again-become the guardian of his servant
and his child's ianoceoce ; and in order ef-
foctualiy to preaerve that innocence, the
beai way woiiUI be found to guard them
n^gainstthe temptations and the opportoni^
tie* of vice. Much pains had been taken,
be said, to misrepresent to the public what
paascd in that place ;~ it had been attempted
to throw such a degree of odium on the
• king^s witnesses, as should ibdiiee the ptih-
lic lo believe their testimony insufficient to
convict men charged with secret and most
enormous criroeSi — It was true, indeed, that
the witness on a late prosecution had been
proved to be a man who had been guilty of
veiy atrocious oifences, but by wmmi can

A. D. 1795.

[35*

men who have committed crimes iil secrecy
ever be couvicted but by accomplices ? If
men of purity and innocence only can con-
vict in such cases, crimes the most dftn-
gerous to the public must for ever pass un-
punished.

Cooke, ClaytoUf 7\irner, Fhott, Hanlan
and Clarke were then discharged from their
imprisonment.

Thomas Dry, who had been out on bail
on a charge of being a Defender, wjels ci^lled ;
and appearing, he was discharged on his
own recognizance of 50/.

Mr. Attorney General said, that the prin-
cipal witnes against 0/iver Corballv, charged
with high treason, had absconded. Tiie
crown therefore would not produce any evi-
dence against him.

A jurf was then impanelled, to whom
Oliver Corhalfy was given in charge, and
by whom he was acquitted for want of pro-
secution.]

61 5, Proceedings on the Trial of Thomas Kennedy* for HigU
Treason; before the Court holden at Dublin under a
Commission of Oyer and Terminer, on Monday February
22 : 36 Geobqe III. a. d. 1796.t

[Wednetday, December «3r<l; lT9i5.

Brady, Kennedy aiid Hart were this
day brought up and being severally asked,
whether they were ready for their trials,
answered they were not, and an affidavit
was sworn br Kennedy for the purpose of
postpoohag their trials. ,

Mt. JHPiVaffy.— My lords, I am humbly
to move your lordships to postpone the
triab of these prisoners, upon the affidavit
which has inst been sworn by Kennedy on
the part of hinnelf and the other two pri-
soners. The affidavit states that John Le
Blanc, late of this city, but now of Belfast,
is^ a material witness for the prisoners,
without the benefit of whose testimony,
they cannot with safety go to trial ; that
due dOigence would have been used to pro-
cure his attendance but that they did not
know until after the trial of James Wcldon
jresterdajf, that Le B1anc*s testimony would
be material. ^ The affidavit also states that
this application is not made for the purpose
of delay.

Mr. Aitdmev General. — My Lords, al-
though I could show that the affidavit is
not Efficient to induce the Court to put of
the trial, yet I feel that it is my duty, un-
less circumstances made it absolute necei-
'■— ■■■■111. ■■■■■»

♦ Sec the next case.

t Taten by William Ridgeway, esq. Bar-
rister at law.

VOL. XXVI.

sary for the public safety to brmg on the
trials, to show the prisoners every indul-
gence. Therefore, my lord», I shall not
resist this application, and When I do this,
I yield a sreat deal because from informa-
tion, which I have received since yester-
day, I should be able to lay before the
CoOrt evidence to support that which was '
g^ven on the part or the crown. But at'
present, I vield to this application.

The trials of these three men were ac-
cordingly postponed.

MT.mtorney GeneraL^My Lords, from
this alteration in the arrangement which I
made for this day, I am not prepared to go
* on with any other trial.

And thereupon the Court adjourned.]

Monday, February ^^nd, 1796.

The Earl of Clonmelt sat as the Judge of the
Commission,, and was assisted by Mr. •
Justice Chamberlain and Mr. Baron
George.

Brad^, Kennedy and Hart having postponed "
their trials at last commission, upon the in- '
dictment then depending, new bills were sent
up to the grand jury, which bethg returned
true bills ; copies thereof were served upon '
the prisoners previous to this commission, and '
at their own desire, Messrs. M*Na)ly aad'
Lysagfat were assigned their counsel.

This day Thomas Kennedy wns put to the

3 A

3351

96 GEOKGE III.

TruUs 6ftkt JDefindtn^

[856

U

u

bar, and afraigned upon the following indkt-
tnent:

Nete. The caption of this indictment
▼aried from that in the foraicr cases in
fhis particular :~After setting out the
commission as before * it proceeded '*' to
" deliver the gaol ofall the pri'soaers and
** malefactors therein, as often as occa-
''sion should require by the oath of
" Richard Manders of the city of 0ub)in
esq. Edward Bume,'' &c. " (setting out
twenty-three names) of the same, mer-
" chants, good and lawful men of ihe
" county of the city of Dublin, afore-
*' said, then and there impanelled, sworn
" and charged to enquire for the said
** lord the King, and for the body of
''the said county of the said city of
" Dublin,'' it is presented in mauier
and form following, that is to say :

** 'the jurors for our lord the kine, upon
their oath present that an open and public
war on the 20th day of August in the 85tb
year of the reien of our sovereign lord
George the third by the grace of God of
Great Britain France and Ireland king
defender of the faith and so forth and Ions
before was and ever since hitherto by land
and by sea hath been and yet is earned on
and prosecuted by the persons exercising
the powers of government in France against
our most serene and illustrious and excellent
prince our said lord the now king and that
Thomas Kennedy of the city of Dublin and
county of the said city yeoman and Edward
Brady of the said city and county of the
said city yeoman subjects of our sakl lord
the king of his kingdom of IreLiad well
knowing the premises but not having the
fear of God in their hearts nor weigning
the dutv of their allegiance and being moved
and seduced by the mstigation of toe devil
as false traitors of our said lord the now
king their supreme true lawful and un-
doubted lord the cordial love and true obe-
dience which every true and dutiful subject
df our said sovereign lord the king towards
him our said lorn the king should he%r
wholly withdrawing and contriving and with
air their strength ratending the peace and
tranquility otthis kingdom of Ireland to
disturb and thejgovemmentof our saod lord
the king of this his kingdom of Ireland
subvert and our said lord the king
from his royal state title honour power
imperiai crown- and government of this
his kingdom of Ireland to depose- and
deprive and put our said lord the king to
death and final destruction to bring the said
Thomas Kennedy and Edward Brady and
each of thetn on the 90th day of August in
the S5th year of the reign of our said lord
the king and on divers otner days and times
as well Defore as ailer that day at Suffolk-

* See the case of WeldoO; ante, p, 295.

41
«
tt
U
tt
4(
U
ti
tt

u
ti
tt
u

M
4€

a
tt
i<
tt
u
u
tt
u
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt

M
U
tt
tt
<•
«f
tt.
tt
tt
tt
tt

u
it-
tt
u

'' street in the parish of St Andi«ir in fbt
** city of Dublin and the eounty of the said
'' city of Dublin aforesaid with force and arme
'' falsely wickedly and traitorously did com-
'' pass ima^ne and intend and each of tben»
''aid compass imagine and intend the said
" lord the king then and there their supreme
" true and lawful lord of and firom the royal
" state crown title power and government of
" this realm of Ireland to depose and wholly
" deprive and the said lord the king to kill
" and put to death and that to fulfil and bring
"taenect their most evil wicked and traa-
" sonable' imaginations and compasiinga
" aforesaid tl>e said Thomas Kennedy and
" Edward Brad^ as such hlse traitors as afore-
" said and durmg the said war between Uie
" saki lord the kmg and the said persons so
" exercising the powers of government in
" France as aforesaid to wit on the sud 90th
" day of August in the 851h year of the reica
," aforesaid at Suffolk- street aforesaid in tne
" parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the said
" city of DubHn aforesaid and in the ceunbr
'* of the said city of Dublin aforesaid with
" force and arms falsely maliciously and trair
" torously did join unite and associate then»*
""selves and each of them did ioin unite and
" associate himself to and with divers false
" traitors to the joron afbresaid as yet un-
" known and did then and t)iere. with sucb
" false traitors to the jurors aforesaid as yet
" unknown enter into and become of a par^
." and society formed and associated under the
** denomination of Defenders with design and
" for the purpose of aiding assisting and ad-
" hering to the persons so exeranng the
" powers of government in France vm so
" waging war as aforesaid agunst our said
" sovereign lord the kinj; in case thev should
" invade or cause to be mvaded tliis his king-
" dom of Ireland and afterwards and during
" the sud war between our said lord the king
" and the said persons so exercising the
" powers of government in Franoe and ene-
" mies-of our said lord the king on the 90th
" day of August in the said 35th year 6f the
" reign of our said lord the king and on divera-
" otl^r days as well before as after that day
" with force and arms at Suffolk-street afore-
" said and county of the city of Dublin afore-
" said they the said Thomas Kennedy and
" Edward Brady as such false traitors as
" aforesaid in further piosecution of their
" treason and traitorous pur{K>ses aforesaid
" did and each of them did with divers other.
" false traitors whose names are to the jurors
" aforesaid of our said lord the king as yet
" unknown then and there meet ana assem-
" ble to confer treat and consult for and about
" the adhering to joining aiding and asaisting
" of the said persons so exercisme the powera
"of government in France as aforesaid and
" being enemies of our said lord the king. .
" as aforesaid in case they should invade
*f or cause to be invaded' this hia klng-
" dom of Ireland and afterwards to wit oa

S57]

Thomas Kennedjfjbr High Treason.

A. D. 1796.

[356

I'thft twcniiclh'day of August In the thirty-
** fifVh year of the nigo aforesaid and on
^ divers other dinrs as well before as af^er
^ that day with K>rce and arms at Sufiblk-
** street aforesaid in the parish of St. Andrew
^ aforesaid in the city of Dublin aforesaid
** and county of the city of Dublin aforesaid
^ the said Thomas Kennedy and Edward
** Bndy as such false traitors as aforesaid in
** the ranher prosecution of their treason and
^ traitorous purposes aforesaid did then and
^ there with divers other false traitors whose
^ Aames to the said jurors are as yet unknown

Ivand traitorously associate and unite
^ themselves to and with and each of them
^ did associate and unite himself to and with
** divers other false -trsitpr s unknown to the
^jurors aforesaid and did alon^ with said
^ false 'traitors to the jurors aforesaid un-
^ known enter into and become and each of
^ them did enter into and become of a party
** and soctet}r united and associated under the
** denomination of Defenders with design and
^ for the end and purpose of deposine and
^dethroning by force and arms our said lord
^ Ibe king and afterwards to wit on the said
** 80th day of August is the said d5th year of
** the reign aforemd and on divers other days
** as well Wore as alter that day with force and
^* arms at Suffolk-street aforesaid in tlje pa*
^ rish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the city
'' of Dublin aforesaid and coon^ of the city
** of Dublin aforesaid the said Thomas Ken-
^ nedy and Edward Brady as such false trai-
^ tors as aforesaid in further prosecution of
'^ their treason and traitorous purposes afore-
'• sakl dkl then and there with divers other
^' &lse traitors whose siames to.the said jurors
^ are as yet unknown wickedly and traitor-
** ously in order to enlist and procure one
^' William Lawler a liege siibjjecc of our said
^ lord the king ihen and there being to be
^ aiding and assisting -to the persons so ex«
^ercising tBe powers of government in
** France and enemies of our said Icnrd the
^ king as aforesaid in case they should invade
^ or cause to be invaded this his kingdom of
^ Ireland and to eneage and bind himself
** thereto did then and Uiere traitorously ad-
^ minister and cause to be admintsteied on
** oath to the said William Lawler he the said
^^ William Lawler being then and there for
'' that purpose previously sworn a certain
'^ profession declaration and catechism to the
^ purport following that is to say ' I am con-
** * cerned.--So am I.--With who? With the
** * National Convention (meanine thereby
** t the National Convention of France).—
«" What is your dewlgns?— On freedom.—
** * Where is your designs ?'*-The foundation
^ ' of it is ^roimded in a rock.— What is your
** ' designs r-^Cause to ^ueal all nations, de-
" ' throne att kings, to plant the tnie religion
'' * in the hearts, be just. — Where did the
^ ' Cock crow when the whole world heai^
^ * hirof^In France^-^Whatthe password ?—
^ * Eliphisinatifl.*— And aflerwuds to wit on,

'* the said .90th day ofAngnst in the said
^ 35th year of. the reign aforesaid and on
M divers other days as well before as afler thsct
'< day with force and arms at Suffolk-street
** aforesaid in the parish of St. Andrew afore-
^* said in the city of Dublin aforesaid and
** county of the city of Dublin aforesaid the said
<< Thomas Kennedy and Edward Brady as
^' such false traitors as aforesud in further
** prosecution of their treason and traitorous
'* purooses aforesaid did then and there and
** eacn of them did then and there with divers
*' others false traitors whose names are to the
** said jurors as yet unknown wickedly and
'< traitorously in order to encourage coi rupt
** procure and enlist one William Lawler a
^ subject of our said lord the king to become
*^ one of a partv and society formed united
** and associated for the purpose of suhvert-
^ ing and overtummg by force and arms the
<< government of our said lord "the king of
*< and in this kingdom of Ireland as by law
^ established and of dethroning our said lord
''the king did then and there traitorously
** encourage procure and enlist the said Wif-
*' liam Lawler to join himself to and become
** of a parljr and society formed united and
'^ assocutcd for the purpose of subverting and
*^ overturniag with force and arms the go-
« vemoient of our said lord the king of aud
^ in this kingdom of Ireland as by law esta-
** blished and dethroning our said lord the
** king and afterwards to wit on the said
^ eoth day of August in the d6th year of the
** reign a^resaid and on divers other days as
** wen before as aAer that day with force and
" arms at Suffolk- street aforesaid in the pa-
** rish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the city of
'' Dublin aforesaid and in the county of the
^ city of Dublin aforesaid the said Thomas
'* Kennedy and Edward Brady as such false
'^ traitors as aforesaid in further prosecution
<< of their treason and traitorous purposes
'* aforesaid did then and there and each of
^ them did then and there with divers other
^ false traitors whose names to the said jurors
« are yet unknown wickedly and traitorously
^ in order to enlist and procure one William
^ Lawler a subject of our said lord the king
'' to be aiding and assisting to the persons
^exercising the powers of government in
'' France and enemies of our said lord the
'' king as aforesaid in case they should invade
^ or cause to be invaded this his kingdom of
'* Ireland and to bind axtd engage himself
** thereto did then and there traitorously ad-
** minister an unlawfol oath to the said Wil-
'* liam Lawler to the purport following that is
« to say—* I, William Lawler, of my own good
'< ' will and consent, do swear to be true to
" * his majesty king George the third, whilst
'* * I live under the same government^ more I
*' < swear to be true, aiding, and assistant to
« * every brother bound to me by this appli-
** * cation, and in every form of article from
« * its first foundation January 1700, and in
** < every amendment hithprto^ and wiU be

S58]

96 0£ORQ£ IIL

Triah qfite De/cnde

« * obedient ta my committeet, superiors^
<< < oomiaaDdera, and ofiicers in all lawful nro-
^ ' ceoimg9 and not oUierwbe, nor will I
^ * consent to any society or any brother of
« < an unlawlul character, but will observe
« ' and obey the Uws and regulations of my
<• ' committee to whom I belong determined
*^ * brother, nor in any violation of the laws,
^ *' bulto protect my life and property, and the
'< ' lives and {properties of my brethren, and
<^ ' I will subiect myself to my committee-
<.< < men in all biwful proceedings, and not
<' *' otherwise during the reign of his ma-
"^'jesty king George the third whibt
^ * I live under the. same government.
'< ' I likeivise swear I will meet when and
^ < where mv committee will please, and will
^ ' spend what is pleasing to president and
« < company ; I will not quarrel nor etrike any
^ * person wbatsomever, knowing him to faie
** * such* but will liv^ Ibvinglyand friendly with
^ < ever^rone uxnler that denomination ; I witt
^* * not rise any fight or quarrd on account of
^ * my present tfifrui, or back that for unto my
« < brotnerbood/ And afterwards to wit on
** the said SOth day of August in the S5th
^ year of the reign aforesaid and on divers
«* other days as well before as after that day
** with force and arms at Sufiolk^itreet afore^
** said in the parish of St Andrew aforesaid
^* in the city of Dublin aforesaid and in the
<' county of the city of Dublin aforesud the
*^ said Thomas Kennedy and EdMwrd Brady
" as such false traitors as aforesaid in further
*f prosecution of their treason and traitorous
« purposes aforesaid did then and there and
*' each of them did then and there with divers
'* other isdse tjraitors whose names to the said
*< jurors are yet unknown wickedly and trai-
" lorously in order to enlist and procure one
" William Lawler a subject ')f our said lord
^ the king to be aiding and assisting to the
<' said persons se exercising the powers of go*
" vernm^nt in i>aoce and endmies of our
** said lord the king as aforesaid in case
** they should invade or cause to be invaded
** this his kingdom of Ireland aid and assist
'< and then and there were and each of them
^ was then and there present aiding and
<< assisting one James Weldon in adminis-
'< taring an unlawful «ath to the said William
*< Lawler and in administering to and causing
** the said William Lawler to rehearse and re.
<< peat on oath a certain profession declaration
<< and catechism the said unlawful oiih being
" to the purport following that is to say — ^ I,
<' * William Lawler, of my own gocKl will and
^ ' co.nsent, do swea^ to lie true to his m^esty
^ * king George the third, whilst I live under
** * the same government, more I swear to be
^ ' true, tidings and assistant to every brother
** < bound to me by this application, and in
** ' every form of article from its first founda*
^ ^ tion, January 1790, and in evety amend •<
** * ment hitherto, and will be obedient to my
*^ ' committee, superiors, commanders and
¥ f oflkers in all lawful proceedings and not

(t 4

[^80

, nor wtU I eonset&t fto'ny eociety,

*< ^ or any brother of an unkwfiil cbacacter,
<< * but will observe and obey the laws and s&-
** ' gulatioBS of my committee to whom I be^
^ Moag determined brother, nor in any wia-*
^ * tion of the laws but to protect my life and
^ < property, and the lives and properties ofmy
^ ^ bretbraa ; and I will subject myself to my
^ < commUtee-raen in all lawfiil proceedinj^,
^ < and not otherwise during thexei^a of hi^
** * muesty king George the third, whiksil liv«
<<< under the same government. I likewise'
<< < swear I will meet when and where my com-
^ ' mittae will please, and will spend what is
<< < pleasing to president and company ; I wili
<< < not quarrel nor strike any person what-
^•* somever, knowing him to be 8ucli» but wilt
" < live lovingly and friendly with every one*
** < under thstdenominatioii ; I will ixit rise any
<f < fight or quarrel on account of my^praaeint
^**itUrutfOT back that part for unto ray hio-*
<< < therbood' ; andjthe said profession dedam^'
** tion and catechism being of the purport £oU
*< bwing tliat is to si^y— • 1 am conoemed.—
«" < 2io am I.--With who ?— With the NatMoal
* <Conventton,(meaningtfaerebytheNatiettal
** < Convention of Franca)— What is yovr de^
signs ?*— On freedom.p-Where is your de-
^ 'signs f— The foundation of itismunded
<< ' on a rock.— W hat is your designs r— Causd
^ * to queiU all nations, dethrone aU kings, t6
<< * plant the true religion in the hearts, be just:
« (.-Where did the Gxkcrow when the whole
<< < world heard him ?— In France.— What is
** * the pass word 2-r>Elipfaismatis.''--- And the
" said jurors of our said lord the king upon
<< their oath further present that an open*
«< «Dd public war on the said seventeenth day
** of August in the thirty-fifUi year of thd
** reign of our said lord George the third and
" so forth and long before and ever since
^^ hitherto by land and by sea bath been and
" is carried on and prosecuted by the persons
** exercising the powers of government in
** France against our most serene illustrious'
** and eicellent prince Greorge the third now
^< king of Ireland and so forth and that the
** said Thomas Kennedy and Edward Brady
'< (being then and there subjects of our said
f« lord the king) of his kingdom of Ireland
** well knowing the premises not having thd
^* fear of God in their hearts nor weiehin^
^ the duty of their alleg^nce but Being
^* moved and seduced by the instigation of
"^ the devil as false traitors against our most
« serene illustrious and excellent prince
** George the third now king of Ireland and
*' so forth and contriving and with all thef^
" strength intending the peaoeof this kiagdooi
*' of Ireland to disturb and the government
** of this his kingdom of Irdand to subvert
« —The said Thonuw Kennedy and Edwitrd
** Brady on the twentieth day of Aucust id
'* the thifty-fifUi year of the reign aferesaid
** and on divers other days and times as well
'' before as after that day wilh fovce and
<<arms at Suffolk^sUact aibresaid in/th<

$sti

T%omu Xemudlffjor Higk Treaton.

A. D. 1796.

[868

-it
U
if

M
•4

U

U
U

u
u
u
«

4<

«

4<
««
41
4t

u
*f

«
*4
4*
44
4<
««
A4
4t
«
44
44
44
44
^<
<4
44
44
44
44
44
44
«4
44
4«
<4
44
44
44

•<

44
44
44
41
4C
41
44
44

liarish 6f 8t.' Andrew afoieiaid hi tlie city
of Dublin afaretaid and county of the city
of Dublin aforesaid unlawiiiliy and traitor-
ously were and each of them was adhering
to aiding and comfisrting the said persons
eierdnng the powers of government in
France and enemies of our said lord the
king as aforesaid and 4bat the said Thomas
Kennedy and Edward Brady in the pro-
secution and execution of the said traitorous
adhering of them the said Thomas Ken-
nedy aim £dward Brady to the sud per-
sons eaerci«ine the powers of government
in Fiance as amresaid and being enemies of
our said lord the present king as aforesaid
to wit on the twentieth day of August in
the thirty-fifth year of the leien aforesaid
at Suffolk street in the parisa aforesaid
and in the county of the city of Dublin
aforesaid with fbice and arms falsely ma-
liciously and traitorously did ioin unite and
associate themselves and each of them did
join aiul associate himself to and with
diveis false traitors to the juiprs aforesaid as
yet unknown .and did then and there and
each of them did then and there with such
false traitors to the jurors aforesaid as yet
unknown enter into and beoome of a party
and society formed and associated under
the denammBtion of Defenders, with design
and for the purpose of aiding assisting and
adhering to the said persons so exercising
the powers of government in France and so
waging war as aforesaid against our' said
sQverei^ lord the now king in case they
should invade or cause to be invaded this
bis king^m of Ireland. And the said
Thomas Kennedy and Edward Brady in
the prosecution and execution of the said
traitorous adhering of them the said Tho-
mas Kennedy and Edward Brady to the
ttid persons exercising the powers of go-
vernment in France as aforesaid and bemg
enemies of our said lord the present king as
aforesaid to wit on the twentieth day of
August in the thirty*fifth year of the reign
aforesaid at 8uffi>lk-street in the parish
aforesaid and in the county of the city of
Dublin aforesaid with force and arms
falsely maliciously and traitorously did ioin
unite and associate themselves, and each of
them did join and to and with divers folsc
traitors to the jurors aforesaid as yet uur
knowtt and did then and there and each
of them did then and there with such false
traitors to the jurors aforesaid as yet un-
known enter into and beoome of a party
and society formed and assockted under tlie
denominatkm of Defenders with design and
for the purpose of aidipg assisting and
adhering to the said persons so caeroising.
the pewera of government in France and so
wagiO^war as aforesaid agsinst our said
sovereign lord the now king.**

The seme overt ads were stated in support
of the seeoiMl cooH^ and ia the same

manner as set forth in the first, and then
the indictment concluded as in the pre-
ceding cases.

The prisoner pleaded — Not Guilty.
The following gentlemen were sworn upon

TBfi JURY<

Alex. Kirkpatrick.
Samuel Tyndal.
Cornelius Gautier.
John Evatt.
David Weir.
Wro. Watson, jun.^

Joshua P. Meredith.
George Adamsdn.
Samuel Middleton.
John Ormston.
Meade Nesbitt.
Godfrey Bourne.

Mr. AUomof Genera/.— My lords^ and
gentlemen of the jury— I am in this case
counsel for the crown. — Gentlemen, you are
engaged upon a subiect of the last import-
ance;— ^a subject, the proper discharge of
which may tend to restore peaee to the coun*
try. But while it must be the object of every
man to attain that end, it must not be attain-^
ed by innocent blood. It is your duty to de-
cide between the crown and the prisoner. It
is the doty of us all to come at the truth ;—
Iwving found it you will give your verdict ac«
cording]y. If the prisoner be innocent, you
will acouit him. It on the other hand you be
satisfied of his eiiilt, as men having n regard
to the sacred obligatbn of an oath you will
find him guilty, in order that by the example^
other men may be deterred from committing
the highest crimes known lo the law*

It will be my duty, gentlemen, to state the
&cts, which will be given in evidence before
you; and I shall briefly observe upon the
crime for which he is indicted. Unhappily^
gentlemen, the crime of treason has been too
much the subject of discussion for some time
past— a crime so little known in this countiy
for an hundred years. The prisoner at the
bar stands chained with hi|h treason, in two
respects ; in imagining the death of the king^
and in adhering to the enemies of the king.
With regard to the first, you are to under-
stand—and I will state it but briefly, as the
Court will enlarge more fully upon it— that to
find a man guilty of compasaiog the death of
the king, it is not necessary that the jury
should be satisfied, that the intent was to take
away the life of the king; it is sufficient, that
you are satisfied, that the intent was such aa
necessarily led to thai fatal consequence. If
a man intend to levy war and dethrone the
king, although in his own miad he has pre*
determined not to put the king to death, yel«
you beii^ satisfied that he intended to de*
throne the king, t*hat, in the eye of the law ia
a compassing of his death : because the one
cannot take effect without the other follow-,
mg almost of ntoessity. If you, gentlemen,
shall be satisfied, that the prisoner meditated
to do any act which led in its consequences
to the deathof the Idqg, then you are to find
the prisoner guilty.

With regard to the second charge, that of
adhering to the enemies of the king^ it is imt

S6S]

S6 GEORGE IIL

Triaii qfth$ Dtfenditi

possible to make it more explicit, than the or-
dinary form of words. The crime of high
treason, which you are now sworn to pass
your verdict upon, differs in the manner of es-
tablishing the ^It, from any other known in
the law. The imagination or intent to com-
mit the crime, is the crime itself. The mere
intent, in any other case, will not constitute
' the crime ; but because the kin^ is the chief
magistrate of the state, and his presence is
necessary to the tranquillity of the state and
of individuals, the law has made the imagin-
ins, intent and design in that instance crimi-
nal; and in that instance alone, the intent is
a crime ; but the law, while it does thus pre-
serve the life of the chief magistrate, does,
with eoual care, guard the life of the subject
charged with such an offence ; and thoush
the imagination constitutes the crime, yet the
law says, there must be evidence of aybc^ done
to show that imagination ; that is called an
overt act, an act openly done. In the present
case, it is not necessary that you should em-
barrass your minds with the charp of com-
passing the kin^s death, because if the evi-
dence shall be given according to my instruc-
tions, it will support the cha^e of adhering
to the king's enemies, and that is evidence or
compassing the king's death. In short, the
charge will be proved, that he adhered to the
enemies of the king ; and that will be estab-
lished by clear overt acts. There are emfat of
them stated in the indictment ; I sh^ not
enumerate them all, but confine myself to
those which are so plain that it is impossible
ibr any man not to understand thom, and
m^ill be. so fully proved that no doubt can be
entertained.

Gentlemen, there has existed, and there
does exist within this kingdom of Ireland"^
what we all know, for it is impossible for a
jury to shut their e^es agsdnst itr-a treason-
able conspiracy against the estabfished go-
vernment in church and state, by persons
sterling themselves Defenders in various parts
of the kinj;dom, uniting themselves by sig-
nals and signs, by which they could be known
to one another in any part of the country.
These signals have been communicated to
them fiom ouarters not yet perfectly disco-
vered; but tne existence of the conspiracy has
been proved^ and wi)l be again proved to you ;
it is as notorious as that the kins reigns, or
any other historical fact. The charge which
you are now to tr^ b, that the . prisoner was
one of that conspiracy. The overt acts to
piove this, are what I shall now mention : a
man of the name of Williani Lawler--
[Here Mr. Attorney General stated the trans-
actions which took place at the different meet-
ings, which being detailed in the preceding
cases, it is thought unnecessary to repeat. He
then proceeded]— Gentlemen, if the evidence
be a8.stated« the only question for your consi-
deration will be, what credit should be given
to the' witness, Lawler ?•- *You may be told
thai ba is a man of abandoned and immo^

[364

character, flagitious in his conduct, and repro-
bate in his principles, and therefore you are
not to place any reliance upon his testimony.
—Gentlemen, I do not wish to conceal any
thing respecting the conduct, the manners, or
the principles of the witness— he was cer-
tainly, at one time, an accomplice in euilt
with the prisoners at the bar ; but from whom
is information of treasonable designs to be
had, \i- it be not received from such men ?
Here the treason has been carried on with se-
crecy— a secrecy secured by the solemnity of
oaths and mutual pledges of attachment. If
therefore, accomplices are not received, the
system of treason must proceed until it is
complete, and triumphs with impunity over
justice and law. Respectable characters are
not to be expected in such cases; loyal sub-
jects will not embark in dark plots, conspi*
racies, and nmchinations against the state.
Here has been a treasonable conspiracy batch-
ed in secret, which in all probability never
would have been developed, but frym the in-
formation of persons actually implicsled in
the crime. But. gentlemen, thougb the wit-
ness who will be produced tins day before
you, mi^ht have been for a time connected
with traitony and an abettor of their conspi-
racies, will it be argued, that he might not
have been a deluded man*^that he might not
have been awakened to a sense of his guilt,
stop short before the completion of their
crimes, and becoming sensible of the danger
in which he had involved society, endeavour
to make some atonement to his country, by
confessing his criminality, discovering his ac-
complices, and rescuing his fellow subjects
from the horrors of confusion, anarchy, and
bloodshed, into which they were on the brink
of beinj; overwhelmed ?

But in truth, gentlemen, this witness will
not appear in the light of a common approver,
giving testimony from the hope of reward,
and with a view to save his own life. This
man was not in such a situation — no charge
was nude against him, he was not in cus-
tody, nor was any reward offered for disco-
very. He made his confession voluntarily ;
it was the conscientious result of a repenting
mind, and of alarm and terror excited by the .
discoveiy of designs of blood and massacre,
which had net beod previously communicated
to him. Nother, gentlemen, are you to con-
sider him as an uncorroborated witness. On
the contrary, his testimony is confirmed by
facts incapable of contradiction. Indeed the
law of treason in Ireland, nmkes the evidence
of one witness sufficient to convict a prisoner,
if that evidence be recMved by a jury as cre-
dible. In the present case, you will have
.strong concurring evidence to establish the
veracity and conustency of the witness,
namely, papers found in the fob of the priso-
ner's breecnes, which papers were so found in
consequence of the previous information

f'ven to the magistrate by the witness. Out,
do not urge this with a view of making an

365]

Thomas Ktnnedyjbr High TVeasoni

A. D, 1796.

L3b6

knprestfoii upon jovr'mindft unfavourable to
the prisoner ; the evidence will be hishly de*
serving of your consideration, and I nave no
doubt, will be minutely attended to.

Gentlemen, before I conclude, I must beg
leave to say a word with respect to the at*
tempts which have been made to influence
the public mind, and agitate the feelings of
the public, by abuminableand scandalous pub-
lications in newspapers, reflecting upon the
credit of Lawler, the witness — publications
which have been filled with misrepresenta-
tion, and are calculated to defeat the ends of
public justice. Gentlemen, I do not say this
to raise a prejudice in your minds against the
pnaoner, but to encounter that which by pos-
sibility may have been excited through the
medium of those publications to which I have
alluded.— In truth, gentlemen, the trials of
Weldon and Leary went upon distinct
l^umls ; and I do aver, and shall unques-
tionably prove it, that upon the evidence
^iven m the respective cases, Weldon was
justly convicted, and Leary perhaps reason-
ably acquitted.

Mr. JLyM^Afrf-*! must beg leave to inter-
rupt Mr. Attorney General. I conceive it is
not regular to allude to past trials, even in
atatement.

Earl of C^oiune//.— I never heard that it was
carried farther than in a case, where Mr.
Yorke declared, that nothing should be stated,
which could not be given in evidence.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— My lord, I do not
mean to uree any thing which is not regular ;
and upon the whole ottbe case, I conjure the
gentlemen of the jury to discard every pre-
judice from their minds — to reject every thing
vrhich they have previously heard— and ~U>
rest their verdict solely upon the impression
which will be produced oy the evidence in
court.

William Lawler* sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.

Saurin.

•

Said be went to I/>ndon in the year
1791, where he worked at his business,
vrhich was that of a gilder; — became a
member of the London Corresponding Society
—their object was a radical reform in parlia-
ment— returned to Ireland about two years
^o— had a letter of introduction from Daniel
Isaac Eaton, a bookseller in London, to Mr.
Archibald Hamilton Rowan, of Dublin— did
not know the contents of Uie letter, but it
was to introduce him to Mr. Rowan— did not

*^*'The general tenour of the witness's
testimony upon this trial, corresponding with
what he bad given in the two former cases, in-
duces the reporter to abridge it considerably,
and to state it in the form of a narrative, ra*
ther than by question and answer, as has
been done where it is set forth at large."
Orig, Edit, See Lawler's examination on the
Trials of Weldon and Leaiy, p. 251. and p.
50^ of i\}lB Volume.

t

ask Eaton for th^ letter, bnf understood be
corresponded with Rowan.— Witness upon his
return to Ireland, became a member of a so*
ciety— does not recollect the name— it was
soon afUr dissolved, but was a republican so-
ciety—gave the letter to a servant of Mr.
Rowan's, two or three days after he arrived
— does not know the street, it was the left
hand of Britain- street— called in a few days,
and saw Mr. Rowan himself— he gave^witness
a print of Thomas Paine. — ^Witness became
acouainted with Burke, who was expelled the
college, and Atkinson, the son of a watch*
maker in Skinner- row, who told him Burke
was collecting ten men, and desired witness
to meet him at Galland's in Crane- lane— the
Telegraphic Societv afterwards met in HoeyV
court. Burke told him the plan was that he
himself named ten, each of whom was to find
ten others, and each of those were to find ^ve
—this would make a sufiicient force to take
the Castle of Dublin— one hundred were to
be cloathed in scarlet uniforms, to make the
citizens believe the soldiers had joined them
—witness made up his ten in a fortnight, and
procurcti a room in High-street, where they
met— rthev were called the Philanthropic So-
ciety. About a fortnight after the Fermanagh
militia went to Lehuistown camp, witness
became a Defender— was introduced to that
society by Kennedy the prisoner at the bar,
and Brady — they called at hb lodgings on
Sundav evening, and brought him to the
horse-barrack, where he was to be sworn a
Defender by Weldon, to whom witness was
to pay a shilling, as he was a Committee-man
—had known Brady and Kennedy before—
they were members of the Philanthropic So*
ciety— had a conversation with them three
weeks before about Defenderl— they said
there was a thine getting among the army, so
that they could do without the societies — ^they
said they were sworn by Hanlon, of the Fer-
managh militia, and as Hanlon had gone to
the camp, they would bring the witness to
Weldon, whom they met at a public- house
opposite the barrack-gate — they were joined
by Clayton — ^Weldon said, <<Had we not
better make these two?" meaning Clayton
and the witness— a prayer*book was (produced,
and Weldon oulled two papers out of his
pocket, desirea the witness and Clayton to
lay their right hands on the boek, and repeat*
after him, which was done— these are the
papers. The next time witness saw these
papers, was about eight days after Weldon
left town, in the possession of Kennedy in
Druryolane— Murpny and Fay were with the
witness — knew them to be Defenders, by
their using the sipis— Kennedy came out of
his master's house into Drury-lane with these
papers— witness challenged them, loud exioueh
for all to hear— Kennedy allowed them to be
the same papers. When Weldon swore them
upon the test— he told them the signs by
which they might know a Defender [Here
the witness described the signs as before^

8B7]

36 6E0RGB III.

THals of the Defenders^^

tsm

vidk i>* 955]. W«ldoii said Eliphismatts was
a UAin wora, bul he did not know the mean^
iog of it He also said, ^ If the king's head
w«re off to-morrow, they would be no longer
under fab government." Witness asired
Weldon, was he not afraid to carnr those
papers about him— he said no, tor ne was
Bfitf er searched, and dkl not care who saw the
large one, the small one was the principal,
the other was only a test on account of swear-
ing the soldiera. Brady asked if there was
any one to head them ? Weldon silid there
was one in the North, but did not mention bis
name. Rennedv' asked how they would be
iofbrmed? Weldon said there would be let-
ten^ sent through the country to inform the
Defendera when ^ they were to rise. Brady
asked how every one would know it'? • Weldon
said, by the Committee-men — he would tell
Brady whonthe next meeting vrould be hold,
that there would be one next wedc. Clayton
and Kennedjrthen went away, the rest re-
mained drinkingpunch— they were all sober;
but Kennedy was obliged to go home, being
an apprentice. [The witness then gave an
account of the meeting, in Plunket-streel,
precisely as in the former case, vide pp. 350,
257.]**-— I'he next meeting waa at Stoney-
batter, which was held for the purpose of
going out to take arms. Hart swore a young
man, and mentioned that their object was to
assist the French IVide pp. S57 ei uqJ\.
This was sometime in the month of August.
The next meeting was at Nowlan's, in Dniry-
lane, on Sunday the 93rd of August^-- agood
many attended— Cofiey was in the chair-^he
wanted to know how manv Defenders were-
ii» Dublin, that they might have officers
placed over theitt-^it was agreed to meet'on*
the Sundkv fallowing, when the Committee-
men would report the number»— Hart and the
witness were called to order > for talking to-
gether.— Hart told him-^[tbis evidence was
•tijeeted to and not admltted]'^theday afler
he ceased to be a Defender, and gave infor-
mation to Mr; Cowan, in Grailoif-streei -•»
Witness's reason was on account of what hte'
had heard 'from Hart, as to the desigfis of the
Defenders ;-^heard there> was to be a meeting
at Crurolio, told Mr, Cowan of it, and also
alderman Janies ;>-«witness went there to
delay them- —they went to that place to be ovt
of the way--r»the prisoner was not at Crumltn
—witness told the alderman he would be
there^ and knew he himself was to be taken
with the re8l-*-tohl • alderman James that the
papers upon which vntness was sworil by
Weldon, were in Kennedy's fob-*~saw them at
a meeting at Dry^s in Cork«streft,on the 9drd
of August, whten they were produced b^ Ken-
nedy, who took them from his fob, and asked
if Lewis was not a proper person to be sworn
a Defender P — was answered by Dry, he was
—Coffey produoed the prayer-book— Kennedy
laid the papers upon Coffey's bed, which was
strapped up like a trunk— there were three
papers— Kennedy said he had written ose

himself, for there wasrone of WekfonVwfaicfaf
he did not like— witness paid no attention to
the third paper ;— alter Lewis was swom,^
Kennedy put the papers into his fob again—'
-^Lewis called on witness the same day after
dinner— they went to the Philanthropic So^
ciety, which usually met at Dry's in Cork^
streetp— it was to meet that evening at five
o'clock— the meeting at Nowlan's waatobef
at six — Lewis was sworn before they went Uw
Nowlan's— 4aw the papers vnth Kennedy at'
Dry's, but not at Nowlan*s-«^when ho reail
the papers, he read gs kings.

[The two papers were then read, for which^
Tfkk indictment]

Cross-examined by Mr. M^NaJly.

Was brought up in the Protestant religions
—his father and mother were Pralestants*-*
knows that every true Protestknt believes itk
the Trinity— went with the Methodists before^
he went to England, but did not then deny
the Protealant religion— som<$tim«S' went to-,
church, sometimes to chapel — obncioued m
Methodist afler his t^um t» Irehmd— has
read the 1st and 3ndpaftsof Pune's Righttfof
Man, but never read his Age of ReasMx— i^'
ways believed in God, and a future state, but^
Borke wanted to persuade him to bdieve
there was no Saviour, and that iie was afiilse*
prophet ; — Burke gave him a little book writ •
ten by himseiti and signed with his name, iar
stippoirt of his doctrine-*it shook* witness in
his belief, but be was since convinced of hia^
error, and was sorry for it — had done many
thines before which were wrong;-*Witness'
askc^ the chainnen, at the corner of the
street, what number Rowan lived at— the'
name of ibe street was on the back of lhe«
]elter<»^EatoiA tpM him, he mentkmed him in'
the letter to Rowan — never was charged *nth>
bringing a false letter to Rowan-«-therc was »
false name in the letter to HoWan, for witness
went by the name of Wright in LoAdon, and
that most have been the name inr the letter-^*
when witness told Rowan his name, whece he*
lived, and of the Gorrespoodiug Society/
Rowan did not ask him to coaie again — he'
gave witness some printed papers, does not-
recollect exactly what they were— never waa'
charged with being a thief— it was said he took
a' frame from Mr. Robinson*^' but another
person afterwards told him he knew who stole
it^Rowan asked him about the society iiK
London and the mHitia, and aboat forming a'
society here— this passed in Newgate— -one"
Streph6n, whb came to witness, mentbDcd a
wish, that there should be a* society formed^
here like the London Oorresponding Society'
— ^witnes» advised an application toRbwan,/
who approved of it, but desired tbehi to be •
cautious, as they saw what a scrape he had '
got into— the reasot> he changed his name was^
on account of his having enlisl^,. and dcf*
sefted — ddes not exactly recollect what he
swore when lie was atle8ted***wa» not tbe»»'

.>

369]

l^onm Ketmetfyjbr High Treason,

A. D. 1796.

[S70

member of any society-^^-aAer he deserted, he
became a member of the Lonclon Corresuond-
ing Society^ went publicly there, and oeing
but little Imown, thought there was no danger
of his being apprehended, particularly as be
had changra his name — ^belonged to the 16 th
diviaon of the Corresponding Society — be-
lieves he was guilty of a breach of his oath,
'When he deserted, is sorry for it — he col-
lected ten members for the Philanthropic So-
ciety, they were sworn not to withdraw from
the society, nor divulge their secrets— did not
upon any former occasion swear in evidence
that the oath was, not to give evidence against
each other — hopes he will be pardoned for all
his ofRsnces, but cannot hope for reward, as
nothing bad been promised him — made no
objection to Weldon's oath, nor was he
shocked at the supposition of the king's head
bein£ cut off— he did not then tliink it a cri-
ming act — one of their members had been
arrested and lodged in a watch-house— they
went to take him out, there was a shot fired
»-b not bound to tell who fired the shot —
after a meeUng in Stoneybatter with Fay and
Kennedy the prisoner and some others, they
had a Uuk of a design to attack the chan-
cellor in the course of the winter, as he re-
turned from the House of Lords, and to hang
hini from one of Uie trees in Stephen's-green
—did not mention this in his information to
idderman James, but intended to have men-
tioned it to him ; it might not have come out
bow liad not counsel desired him to tell all
the treasons he knew of-nloes not know who
threw the stone at the chancellor, nor did he
see It thrown — told alderman James the reason
be became a Defender was, to know what they
were about— agreed with them in every thin^,
but what he heard Hart say— has been kept in
close custody in the Castle for three months for
the purpose of giving; evidence aeainst the pri-
soners— Burke was the principal person, who
led him astray in rengious matters — Mr.
Cowan advised him to give information — was
standine in Dame-street the day lord Camden
arrived here— was also in the Castle-yard that
day — ^never threw a stone at the chancellor,
nor heard of a stone being to be thrown, till
after it was thrown — does not recollect any
reason he had for going home early the even-
ing the stone was thrown — was called on and
went out with the party to confine Cockayne
—were prevented by his not being at Mrs.
Jackson's— Le Blanc said if Cockayne was
put to death, what he had sworn would stand
good; —witness had a pistol when he was in
the watch-house— there was a pistol fired, it
bad a ball in it— was present at the attack
upon a fiouse the comer of Bull-alley, in going
home— had pistols about him, but does not
know whether he had charged them or not— it
was a crimping-house ; — believes the oath was
written by Hanlon, the Fermanagh militia-
man.

VOL. XXVI.

Mr. Alderman James sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Solicitor General.

Lawler came to hiih with Mr. Cowan, about
the 26th of August, and lodged informations.
His evidence upon the former trials and the
present, corresponded with the account he
then gave, except as to the design upon the
chancellor. The alderman issued warrants
against several persons in conseauence of the
informations, and he desired Mr. Carlcton,
the chiefconstable,tobe particular in examin-
ing Kennedy's fob, for Lawler said the oath
would be found there — took Lawler's exami-
nations the first time he saw him— no exami-
nations hsd been lodged against Lawler at
that time, nor did the alderman ever issue a
warrant for his apprehension, but issued war-
rants against many other persons upon his in«
formations.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lysaght.

Lawler did not disclose the circumstance
respecting the clumcellor—- The alderman
thought it his duty to find out every thing— >
cannot say that Lawler intentionally with-
held it — he did not disclose the circumstance
of his enlisting or desertinjg, or that he had
fired a shot into the watch-house. — He was
examined after dinner, about eight o'clock-
no warrant was issued to apprehend him. but
he was taken at the house of one Toole in
Crumlin, in consequence of his information
that he would be there.

OUver Carletoiif esq. sworn.— Examined by

Mr. Ruxton.

Was high constable of police in August
last— received warrants from alderman James
against Kennedy, the prisoner, and Bradv, in
consequence of which he went to Stephen-
street, between four , and five in the morning
of the 27th of August— rapped very loud at
the door, two persons came to a gate and
opened it — he asked their names, they an-
swer^ Kennedy and Brady — he took them
into custody, and agreeable to the directions
he bad received, was , particular in searching
Kennedy's fob, in which he found the oatn
and catechism — ||they were here shown to the
witness, and he identified them from the ini-
tials of his name.].

Cross-examined by Mr. M^Nally,

He asked Kennedy how the papers came
there, and what was the use of them ?— He
made no answer.

[Case rested for the crown.]

Defence.

Mr. M'Nally, — My lords, and gentlemen of
the jurv, lam of counsel in this case with my
learneo friend, Mr. Lysaght; and it therefore
becomes my duty to call your attention to the
defence of the unfortunate young boy, who
stands a prisoner at the |^ar of the court, ar-

2 B

371] S6 GEORGE III.

Triah of the De/enden^

{3t9

a-aigned for hi^h trea^n. GentleintD, I apply
to him the epithet of unfortunate, not because
the evidence that has been given against him,
can, in my humble opinion, impress your
minds with a conception of his bemg guilty,
but because any subject of the crown, stand-
ing in bis situation, standing in that dock,
and before this tribunal accused of the
most heinous offence the law recognizes,
and punishable by the most cruel sentence
the law knows, must be considered as un*
fortunate, however conscious of his own
Innocence. Gentlemen, I address you on the
part of this unfortunate youth, under the in-
iluence of that reverential awe which always
influences my mind when calling for the at-
tention of a jury of your description. A jury
vrhich I am convinced, from my personal
knowledge of some of you, and from the ge-
neral character of you all, is composed of wise
and intelligent men ; men whu are well ac-

auainted with the principles of those laws un-
er which we live, and fey which the lowest
of us are protected, and fully adequate to the
honest dischargeof that high and respectable,
I was going to say paramount office, which
they fill. In addressing you, gentlemen, I,
must of course, feel for my own deficiency ;
but I find consolation from this reflection;
that you^ actuated by the principles of mercy,
"While guided by the rules of law and justice,
will contribute every aid to such observations
as I shall submit to your deliberation. Gen-
tlemen, every man who admires and loves
the constitution of his country (and every man
who is not either a knave, a fool, a lunatic, or
an infant, must admire its system), I say
every man who loves and admires the system
of our constitution, must look up to juries as
the legal guardians, protectors, and conferva*
tors or the lives, the liberties and the proper-
ties of the people. I consider a jury as a poli-^
cal citadel, placed in the centre of the consti-
tution— a citadel where liberty has oflen
planted her standard, and where she must al*
"ways make an effectual stand against oppres-
sion and tyranny, unless betrayed by those
whose sacred duty it is to protect her.

Gentlemen, it is necessary that I should
make a few observations to you on what has
fallen from Mr. Attorney General in stating
the case for the crown ; and my leading ob*
servation is^ that the learned gentleman, in
the discharge of his official duty, has this day,
in the most honourable and candid manner,
stated the case against the prisoner, without
an attempt to aggravate or colour the charge;
and I doubt not but those other le^fned
counsel for the prosecution, whose duty calls
upon them to foUpw Mr. Attorney General,
will adopt the same manly and humane con-
duct.

I beg leave, gentlemen of the jury, to re*
mind you of the excellent caution urged with
warmth and with clemency, by the attorney-
general. He cautioned you against acting
UAder prejudkes resulting ftWA extnnsie

causes. Hisadvice was just, legal and wise.
A juror should divest bis mind of all extrinsic
matters; he should come into that box pure,
unsullied and unbiassed as an infant entering
into life ; the evidence given in court shoula
be the only object of his deliberation. On the
evidence sworn to in court, and that evidence
only, he is bound in conscience, by his oath^
to form his verdict : fbr what is his oath ? He
is sworn on the testament of his faith, that he
will well and truly try, and a true delivcrapcc
make between his sovereign the king and
theprisoner, according to evidence, For this
reason, gentlemen, if French politics or
French depredations be stated, you will con-
sider them as extraneous to the matter in
issue ; and for this reason, should the counsel
for the crown attempt to engage your pas-
sions by adverting to the distracted state of
this or that country, you will expunge such
statement from your recollection. For yoit
are not sworn to give a verdict upon the state
of France, or upon the state of Ireland, but
truly to try upon the evidence, given to you
upon oath, whether the prisoner be guilty or
not guilty of the crimes of high treason,
charged upon him by the indictment. The
attorney general has adverted to the public
newspapers, and has staled to you that
through their medium pains had been taken
to influence the public mind, in respect to the
trials for treason, now prosecuting bv govern-
ment. Gentlemen, I do think with Sir. At-
torney General, that animadversions on legal
proceedings while they are pending, is an of-
fence : but if Mr. Attorney General his read
all the public papers, he must know that such
animadversions have not been confined to
papers of any particular political description t
for in those papers denominated court prints,
the writers of them have not only traduced
those who have appeared as witnesses fur the

Prisoner, but those employed as their oouusel.
n one of those morning: prints, I have been
noticed with censure, and the character* with
whom I had the honour to act on the trial at
the last commission, a character as great and
eminent for genius as ever appeared at this
or any bar, has been calumniated for exerting
his paramount abilities in defence of his
client. But, gentlemen, I am satisfied that
whatever you have heard, or whatever you
have read relative to the subject now before
you, you will obliterate from your memories,
confining your deliberations solely to the evi-
dence given in open court.

Mr. Attomev General has spoken of the
necessity of msScing an example—in my hum-
ble opinion this was not a sulject to be ad-
dressed to you ; for gentlemen, it is not yoiif
province to make examples, that last and dis-
tressing duty, founded in necessity, l)^ongs
to anotn^r tribunal. Your duty is to hear the
evidence, and on the credit you give to that
evidence to acquit or convict ; and I tirust

* Mr. Curtan*

373]

Tkomoi Kennedy Jbr High Treason.

A. D, 1796.

[374^

from the oature of the evidence, acquittal will
this day mark yciiir verdict— and that the
l»ri«>ner will not be found a subject for ex-
ample.

There are, gentlemen, but two leading fea-
tures in this case to which I shall call your
atlenttoD.

First, Mr. Lawler, the fnrincipal witness
produced oo the table; and secondly the evi-
dence oven by that witness. As to the witness,
tliougn he does not come under the legal des-
crt|ptioa of an approver, ason a former occasion
was staled by the Bench, yet it dearly appears
firomhis own confessions, that he has been a
p^rticepi crminisy in a catalo^e of offences
as vile and black as ever stained a human
hearty or disgraced the character of a man ;
therefore he comes before you, gentlemen of
the jiiry, in at least a questiouaole shape, and
within that rule of law and legal evidence,
that has been laid down by one of the wisest,
and wliat was more to his honour, one of the
Biost humane judges that ever presided in an
Bnglish court of justice-*-! allude, sentlemen,
to that celebrated jurist, whofte noble and in-
dependent conduct deservedly procured him
the Ikie of the'' great lord Hale.''— What are
the words of that great man upon approvers ?
I will tell you, gentlemen, his opinion upon
such witnesses. Lord Hale says, «< though an
approver be admissible as a witness in law,
yet, the credibility of his testimony is to be
lefi to the jury, and truly it would be hard to
take away the life of a person upon the evi-
dence of soch a witness, that swears to save
hta own ; and ^t confesseth himself guihy
of so great a cnme<**-unless there be very con-
siderable circumstances^ which may give
greater credit to what he swears."— This opi-
nion will be found in Hale's Picas of the Crown,
y. 305. — Gentlemen, it will be for you to con*
aider whether the witness, Lawler, come within
the description ^ven by the great and good
krd Hale — and it will also be for you to con-
sider that lord Hale is here speaking of a wit-
ness implicated only in the offence he is called
to prove^ coming forward charged only with
one crime ; but what would the learned and
benevolent lord Hale have said, if he had been .
speaking of such a witness as Lawler? If he
nd been speaking of a, partieep$ rrtimnif, who
had dedared he bad talcen the oath of alle-
giance, as a soldier and a subject, and had
violated that oath? If he had been speaking
of aa impious man, against whom it had been
proved, that he had denied the existence of
the pcnona ot the Trini^ ? If he had been
speaking of a man who had administered
oaths to seduce and delude youths, had sworn
them never to prosecute Defenders, and had
then come forwaid and prosecuted them him-
self? If ha had been speaking of a man who
had united with consunatore to assassinate a
witness f If he had Men speaking of a man
who had confestedy there was a time when he
dki not think it a crime to take off the head
of his ncred mijestyy ttd dcitr^ the govern-

ment ? — ^I add, destroy the government, be-
cause the existence of the constitution and
government of this country depends upon
the existence of the king — A man who,
when the (fuestien was put could not deny,
and therefore refused to answer, that he once
fired a charged pistol into a watch-house, with
intent to commit murder ; and thai there was
a time, and that recent, when he did not con-
sider it a crime to lie in wait for the purpose
of seizins and hanging no less a person than
the lord high chancellor of Ireland. — Tis
true, gentlemen, Mr. Lawley is by his own
account a repentant sinner, for he has told
you, he hopes to obtain forgiveness from go-
vernment and from God. He has now told
vou how lone repentance has dawned upon
him; but if he has repented, how does the
sincerity of his contrition appear ?— Does it
appear as it ought ? — Does it appear he has
made a full confession of all his offences ? —
No, for it appears that he supprescd the
whole of tlie mtended assassination of the
lord chancellor, and the intended assassinalion
of Cockayne, when he gave in his information
on oath to alderman James. — Alderman James
I presume, admonished him, and swore him
to tell the truth, and he suppressed the
truth. I admit, gentlemen, that necessity,
on particular occasions, justifies the admis-
sion of such witnesses as Mr. Lawler,
otherwise, if that was not the case, tlie
most atrocious offences would of\en escape
with impunity; but permit me, gentlemen,
to advert to thie great lord Hale, and on his
authority to observe, that even in such cases,
there must be strong corroborating circum-
stances to give credence to the man who,
even voluntarily, comes forward to save his
Own life, by the sacrificing the life of another.
Gentlemen, the papers found on the pri-
soner and produced in evidence to support
this prosecution, will probably be held up to
you, and expatiated on by the counsel for the
crown, as strong corroborating oircnmstances.
-^But you must have remarked, that no evi-
dence was given by Lawler to show that these
papers are the identical papers that were iuthe
possession of Weldon t of course it does not
appear to you that those papers were ever ap-
propriated to any use, or ever published m
any manner by the prisoner ; and, gentlemen,
the court will concur with me in tnis rule of
law, that the possession of papers without a
publication, however seditious their contents
may be, however treasonable their tendency,
does not amount to high treason, for the mere
possession of treasonable papers does not
amount to an overt act. Goa forbid it should,
for, if that was the case, no man would be
safe;^the false firiend, the bribed servant,
the suborned guest, every sp^ that came into
a man's house, would have it in his power,
by privately depositing a private paper, to
bring his innocent intimate, master, or host
to condign punishment. Gentlemen, a very
melancholy case once occurred in jBogland

375J

S6 GEORGE III.

Triali qftht Defenderi-^

CS76

which very fully illustrates this position. It
is a case well kDown to the learned judges on
the bench ; and, indeed, I believe of general
notoriety. I mean the case of Salmon, Ga-
hagan, and other miscreants, who, in conse-
<}uence of large rewards, offered bv act of par-
liament for the apprehension and conviction
of foot^pad robbers, entered into a conspiracy
to obtam rewards, by falsely accusing inno-
cent young men.* Gentlemen, they accom-
dlished their diabolical scheme, by insinuat-
ing themselves into the confidence of unsus-
pecting and unwary youths, and then putting
marked coin, or other articles into their pock-
ets, by which they fabricated evidence to sa-
tisfy a jury, convicted the dupes of their vil-
lany, and pocketed the parliamentary remu-
neration of their wickedness. They were at
last discovered, and justice cut asunder this

fordian knot of treachery. Thcv were in-
icted for murder, but the law could not reach
their lives — ^they were indicted and convicted
of conspiracy ; they were set in the pillory
and the enraged populace pelted out the
brains of two of them.f Does Lawler appear
a man incapable of such a villainous scheme ?
Is itimprooable that he, with a hope of par-
don and reward before him, possessing the
confidence of the prisoner and having given
information to the magistrate, contriv^ by
some subtle stratagem to convey these papen
to the possession of the prisoner, for the very
purpose of using them afterwards in corrobo-
ration of his own testimony? Gentlemen,
there is one circumstance that strengthens
this position, it is this ; you must recollect
that Lawler swore his reason for getting
among the Defenders was for the purpose of
coming at what they were about; but will you
believe that to be the fact ? — If mere curiosity
was his motive, why did he not secede from
the societies when he did become acquainted
with the purposes of their association? — He
must have had a motive, and that motive
must have been to betray — he must have
been sent in, or he went into the societies for
that purpose. You cannot for a moment
suppose, that the wretch who has confessed,
he would at one time have thought it no of-
fence to take off the head of his anointed so-
vereign, could at any time feel compunction
at murdering his majesty's subjects. Gen-
tlemen, when you come to examine the evi-
dence of this man, inquire among yourselves
whether he has in any material pomt contra^
dieted himself. For it is an established rule,
that if a witness contradict himself in any ma-
terial part of his evidence, it discredits tiie
whole ; and so far has. this wise and radutary
doctrine of evidence been carried, that lord
Mansfield extending the rule to civil causes,
has on trials where one witness has given false
testimony, though there were other witnesses

* See the trial of Macdaniel and others
ante Vol 19, p. 745.
fSceVol, 19,p. g09.

of unim peached characters examined tO the
same points with the prejudiced party, di-
rected the jury to reject the whole of the evi-
dence, and find a verdict against the party
producing such a witness.

Mr. Lawler's character is fully before you
and in your possession ; and permit me to ask
you, haa your knowledge of it ndsed a doubt
in your mind P for if it has rused a doubt,
you are bound by the imperative dictate of
conscience, to acquit the prisoner. You are
bound, I say, not to convict, unless his testi-*
mony be irresistible; and when you take into
your consideration, that only one witness has
been produced to the merits,! rest satisfied, that
you will send this unhappy youth at the bar
home to his narents, where his errors may be
corrected and his mind improved, and notby a
verdict of ^ilty deprive him of his life, under
the infiiction of a judgment the roost severe
that the laws of this country, or perhaps of any
other country, has adopted. I here conclude.
We will now call witnesses to show you and
the court, that Lawler is a person of such in-
famous morals and holding such impious prin-
ples in point of religion, that he ought not tu
De creaited on oath, giving testimony in a
court of justice ; andjthen I rest satisfied, you
will reject his evidence as being unworthy o^
credence, and give life and Titierty to my^
client, by a verdict of not guilty.

Samuel Galland sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Lysaght

Lives at No. 2, Crane-lane, is a grocer, has
known Lawler for four or five year^ and does
not think him a man to be believed upon his
oath.

Cross-examined by Mr. SoUcUor General.

Witness was once a hair-diesser, and has a
brother who has travelled to New-York, last
September, since these people have been
taken up ; there were fourteen or fifteen of
them in a reading societv for the informatioQ
of themselves; no books were bought while
witness was in the society ; they all gave what
books they had for the use of i& society.
His brother went to New-York, to follow his
trade as an engraver, and has been talking of
going there these three years. Witness never
was m the Philanthropic society, but believes
his brother was — witness expressed a con-
cern for Lawler, when he heard he was taken
up-— did not hear of his being taken for a
week after he was taken— witness pitied
him, as being acaised of Defendertsm— ex-
pressed his sorrow and surprise at it, as be
thought him incapable of such a crime; tliey
used to read the papers of the day at
the society. Goldsmith's Animated Nature,
Pope's Works, Chambers's Dktiotiary, &c. —
thought Lawler an innocent lad; but from
witness's knowledge of his religious prin-
ciples, would not Mieve him on nis oath —
1 witness and Lawler were both Protestanta
^<ioes not know where the pereoni are who

S77]

Thomm Kemudjjbr High Treaton,

A. D. 1796.

t378

composed the dab — believes Biirjce ran
away — would not believe hira either on ac-
count of his principles — never knew any of
the Philanthropic society, but his brother, as
be himself was not a member — never heard
of 8trepbon*8 reltgiop^-never expressed his
opinion, or wish for a reform. Pi he witness
declined to answer, whether he had ever ex-
jiressed any opinion upon government] —
witness is about 94 years of age, and never
went to any other reading society for instruc-
tions since he went to scIuk)!.

IficAoUi Clare sworn. — Examined by Mr.

M'Nally.

Is a master taylor, lives at 39, Townsend*
atreety knows Lawler 10 months — would
not Mieve him on his oath — witness be-
longed to a reading society with him, and one
evening Paine's Age of Reason was spoke of
— Lawfer said he would go farther than
Paine, for he denied any part of the Tiintty.

Cross-examined by Mr. iSottria.

Does not know who had him admitted, nor
any of the persons there, but Lawler and Gal-
land — has heard that the taking up of
the prisoners was the cause of Galland*s going
off— witness's reason for not knowing more
of the society was, that he seldom went there
— did not go above four times — never
saw any of the persons accused of high trea-
son, until he saw them in court— believes
he brought his brother into the society —
was acquainted with one Cox — ^witness be-
lieves he brought him into the society —
never knew that Lawler was called to account
for any offence in a court of justice — wit-
ness quit the -society on account of Law]er*s
conduct, and advised his brother to quit it.

John Clare sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.

Was a member of the 80ciety,|knew Lawler,
and was acquainted with his general character,
— would not believe biro on account of his
abandoned behaviour, and denying a future
state — would not take away the life of a fly
upon his testimony.

Cross-examined by Mr. KelU,

Is a taylor, was a member of the society six
months — the greatest number he ever saw
there was 94 — Galland. Atkinson, Cox,
Burke, Diwler, witness's brother were among
the number — it was intended for information;
sometimes they had a law question — witness
hoped to be a magistrate some time, and liked
a law question — they had the news of the day
also, upon which they used t6 argue— Burke
and Lawler were for the Age of Reason being
introduced— witness is a married man, 36
years of age, never was at such a place till
about 3 years ago — they were to have a
French master to teach them French —
Lawlcr's ^getting his hand . cut in a riot, was
the reason witness lefl the sociely— Lawler

was an impious man — never heard why
Atkinson went to America, except it was
to better himself— nor why Galland went—
believes they went together last September —
never heard that counsellor Banington took
Atkinson.

WUUam Ebbt sworn. — Examined by Mr.

M*NaUsf.

Is a pewterer— has known Lawler some
time— he and his wife lod^ in witness's
bouse— Does not think he is a man to be
believed upon his oath— he is a man of
very irreligious principles*«>worked on Sun-
daysy and did not go to any place of wor*
ship.

Cross-examined by Mr. Rux^oa,

Lawler lodged some time in witness's
house, paid his rent, and was an industrious,
regular man— did express a concern at
hearing he was taken up, for he was an in*
dustrious man — his wife was much alarmed,
and hid something in the dirt hole— witness
searched and found two bags of musket-balls
—he also found a sledge— thought these
must have been intended for some wicked
purpose, and wished to get rid of him —
these, coupled with the other circumstances,
induce witness not to believe Lawler— never
offered to go security for him, but said he was
an honest man.

John BMmon sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Lytaghi,

Lawler served part of hb apprenticeship to
the witness— was a bad boy— that is 19 years
since, and witness could not take uoon him
now to say whether he was to be believed
upon his oath.

Cameliui Gauiier (one of the juryj sworn.—
Examined by Mr. M^ Nolly.

Was one of the jury upon Leary's trial-
does not recollect particularly what Lawler
swore upon that trial.

Samuel Tyndall (another of the jury) sworn.
— Exammed by Mr. I^fiagkt.

Was one of the iury upon Leary's trial-
recollects that Lawler tlien swore^ that Mr.
Robinson had beaten him, for which he ran
away,— that was the only reason as he recol-
lects— Lawler said, he was accused of stealing
something from Mr. Robinson.

Mr. liyta^A/— My Lords, and Gentle-
men of the Jury ; — it is my duty to place
the best shield I can between the un-
fortunate youth at the bar, and an ig-
nominkms and untimely death ; and if my
conception of the law applicable to this case,
be just, I feel a strong nope of being able to
convince both the Court and the Jury, that
the prisoner is guilUess of the crime with
which he stands charged; I say emphatically
with which he Hand$ charged; for should yoii,
geotlemen of the jury, squandef jsucb crcdii«

879]

36 GEORGE III.

Trials t/ihe Dffiffidi

lity on IbetcsUmoQj^ that has been adduced,
still, if you do not give entire credence to the
evidence of I^wler, the prisoner, however in
correct, or if you will criminal, if his crime
falls short of high treason, you are bound to
acquit.

The specific treasons charged against him
are, the compassing and imagining the death
of the king, and adhering to the king's cne-
flDies. I shall not deny, that an adherence to
the king's enemies is a substantive treason,
and may be also laid as an overt act, which
il unquestionably is, of conspiring and ima*
gining the death of the king ; but I, with re-
apect for the Court, msist on it, that the barely
having in one's possession without publication
a paper containing favourable sentiments and
wishes towards' an enemy in a distant coun-
<lry, without any communication or corres-
.pondence whatsoever with the enemy ; I say
such a circumstance cannot, on any principle
of law, of authority, or of precedent, that I
know — I say such a circumstance cannot be
swelled up to the enormity of high treason.
I also contend, and I am supportoi by Hale
and Foster, that a bare conspiracy to levy war
for lawless purposes, short of deposing or de-
throning the kio^, or in any degree endanger-
ing his sacred life, is not high treason, nor an
«vert act to Bumifest the compassins bis
death.

Havinjg said so much on the law of trea-
son, so far as it could be supposed to bear on
the present case, I shall have but little to
add to the observations which have been so
•forcibly ur^ed by Mr. M«Nallf , en the evi-
dence of Lawler, eontaminated and damned
as his credit roust be, fh)m his avowed per-
juries, intended assassinations and felonies ; so
totally divested, as he has been proved to be,
of that sense of religion, without which no
man can regard the sanction of an oath— it
would, I am confident, be a waste of time to
4he Court to argue that bis testimony miist
be thrown out of your consideration. What
then is to affect the prisoner's life ? Is it the
unpublished nonsense found oo him i Now,
gentlemen of the jury, as to the declaration,
the words of it are, " I, J. B. of my own good
^ill ftad consent, do swear that I will be true
to his majesty king George the third, whilst
I Hve under the same govern roent.'^-Surely,
•gentiemcn of the jury, "while I live under
his TOvemment," may have been understood
by the youth at the bar, to have meant the
duration of his own Ufe«*there is no innuendo
laid in the indictment to eke out a criminal
construction of this declaration ; there is no-
thing necessarily to be inferred from it in law,
in logic, or in reason, to charge the prisoner
with treason, or even with seaition.

Gentlemen of the jury, as to tha cateclusm,
1 own I cannot say so much, but as it was
pever published by the prisoner, he might, as
judge Blackstone saws, '<keep poison in his
closet," so that he did not vend or disperse it
fills catechisfii majf be considered aa sodir

1380

tious ; yetcourts and juries should be cautious,
how criminal interpretations should be giveu
to words in themselves dubious. In Fleta it
is laid down, that formerly in appeals for trea-
son, the appellant was obliged to prove with
the most critical accuracy and persDicuity, tb«
words and writing imputed, their clear mean-
ing and import, beyond do\ibt or Question, and
if he faile(l in doine so, the appellee was dis-
charged and cleared of the imputed treason*
— But, genUemen of the juiy, I bold in my
hand high authpri^ to show— authority not
expressly stating^, but by fair and almost ne-
cessary implication admitting,— 'that even
the administering unlawful oaths and ensa^
ments, is not considered to amoimt to nigh
treason.»«Defender8 now are what Wbit^
boys formerly were, and the act of the ^Ih
of the king, was seedless and nugaloiy , if the
crimes provided against by it amounted to
treason; [here Mr. l^saght read. extracta
from the acts alluded to, to support his ar-
gument; and contendea, that by this st»>
tute he was impowered to assert that the king^
lords and commons of Ireland allowed im-
pliedly, that the statute of treasons could not
legally operate against Defenderism.V-But
the prosecutions of the present day^ tbouEh
for the same offences, were to vary from the
prosecutions heretofore carried on aguoet
White-bo^ and Bight-boys as they were then
called, and Defenders as'thcgr are now called^
Why? because a general alarm was spptad
thi[ough these kingdoms, and many good and
wise men were infeded wiUi it^-HiDw else
account for the late prosecutions in £dj;land;
the result of which was the acquittal ofadl •>
cused, and the ascertaining thai one oC the
supposed traitors* 0ome Tooke,* waa t m*
tieman of the soundest and most pure pnncip
pies, of unshaken patriotism, and loyal^!
as was manifested by the evidence— My
lords, I ask what precedent can be adduced
to support the pomtion, that the ba/vinga p»-
perofanykina in pne^a possesskm wutaonl
publication, aan be hidi treason F

Uenseyt had sent Tertii hislettmr, it waa
intercepted, but it had gone froo) lum with
intent that it should reach the eneaiy.^Ia
there in the case before you, and on which
^ive me leave to say posterity will cbmment,
IS tbera the shadow of evidence even firom the
infamous and soUtary witness Lawler, thai
any communication or correspondence with
the enemy was bad or intended f—muel not
the tftfearipn be guilty?— Wae Rabelais put
to death for having— It is too solemn an oecap-'
sign to throw out such aUusions* if they be
not relevant^ was Rabelais put In death, even
under a despotic eovemment, for writing la^
bels on phials fuU of briek dust» ** poison for
the king, poison for the queen, &c."? No,
because no treasonable intention could be
proved against him. And will the Court and

• See his Trial, isii<^ Vel 44^ p. 1. ""^
1 8€e bit «MKViHtf^> Vok»i ^^ML

3B1]

Tkomai Kennedj^Jbr High Triaton*

A. D- 1796.

[38B

jury in this case My, without credible proof,
that EKphismatis, and such trash of enigma-
tical or rather nonsensical import— and cer-
tainly not credibly proved to be of treasonable
import— is an overt act of adhering to the
king's enemies? — Where are his enemies?
where I hope they ever shall be, dittant, —
How did the prisoner adhere ^«-Did he cor»
retpand with, did he tend intelligence to f —
Does the very indictment charge that he ad-
hered in any manner, except to use its lan-
guage, in COM the French should land. — I have
beard of constructive treasons — here are even-
toal, contingent treasons — blundering accusa-
tion! Gentlemen of the jury, will you dis-
grace your countvy and yourselves ? — I hope
not — 1 have for myself to lament, that I have
been assigned as counsel for the prisoner but
this day, in the place of that able advocate,
Air. Ciirran, who could not attend; — bull
confide in the wisdom and integrity of the
Court and Jury.

Mr. Lysaght concluded by conjuring the
Court not to put too heavy a weapon into the
hands of justice, by multipl^ns treasons; and
to the jury to reflect on the infamy of Lawler,
and the youth of the prisoner. — Do not, gen-
tlemen of the jury, sufier your consciences to
be biassed by interest or by prejudice, or your
judgment to be shaken by alarm. Do not su-
|)erstitiously imagine, that the poor youth at
the bar is so unhallowed and full of guilt, that
the safety of the state vessel reauires that he
should be thrown Over and perisn.

Mr. Prime Sergeant, ^-My lords, and gen-
tlemen of the jury. It is with no small pain
that I rise upon this occasion, to perform the
disagreeable task which my duty requires.
No roan can feel more sincere compassion
than I do for the unfortunate youth at the
bar, and no man would feel more happy at
his bein^ able to establish his innocence to
the sdtimction of the jury. But, gentlemen,
justiceim poses an indispensable duty upon
me, and-yrhile I am ready, with the greatest
candour, to allow the unhappy prisoner every
advantage which the ingenuity of his coun-
sel coum suggest upon the facts adduced in
evidence ; yet, gentlemen, I must, in advert-
ing to that evioence, be obliged to show it in
a very difiisrent light indeed, from that in
which it has been exhibited by the prisoner's
counsel. I shall be obliged to demonstrate
to you, that the facts proved^ do fully support
thechar^ofhieh treason, agreeably to the
construction of Uie statute of treasons, as laid
down by the learned gentleman who stated
the case on the part of the crown.

Mnch has been said, gentlemen, with re-
spect to the testimony ofLawler ; it lias been
violently arraigned by the prisoner's counsel.
But, ^ntlcmcn, I must deny it is that species
of evidence which it has been called; namely,
the evidence of an approver swearing to save
bit own life^for here, eentlemen.no promise
of reward ever appeared or existed. Lawler
bad not been apprehended, he was not in cus-

tody, he was not even charged with any
crime ; and he appears to have acted solely
from motives of compunction. Gentlemen,
suppose a man had been at one period of his
life of abandoned or dissolute pnnciples, was •
no room ever to be left for renectance, or
amendment ? If the witness haa no scruples
of conscience, by listening to which, he hoped
to make some atonement to hb country, for
the mischief he was promoting, by stopping
its current before it overwhelmed the coun-
try; if, gentlemen, the witness were afraid
merely of personal mischief, he might have'
withdrawn from the scene ; be was at perfect
liberty to do so. No person accused him, he
was not even suspected, save by his accom-
plices ; he could have fled to America or else-
where, but his testimony has been perfectly'
consistent throughout the trial, as it has been
during the former ones. What was his ac-
count? he told vou he was appalled with hor-
ror at hearing the real intention of the De-
fenders, whicn he was unacquainted with be-
fore; he therefore deterromed to abandon
them, and if possible, to prevent the comple-
tion of their diabolical purposes. He dis-
closed the matter to Mr. Cowan, who advised
him to lodge informations, which he accord-
ingly did ; and it appears he did so volunta-
rily, without any apprehension of prosecution^
or promise of rewara.

Gentlemen, the circumstance of being a
Defender, is of itself a strong impeachment
upon the moral character of a man. But will
it be pretended that it altogether precludes
his testimony, where he could have had no'
necessity fur coming forward, no fear of pu-
nishment, no promise of reward, no apparent
object, but what he told jrou himself, the pre-
vention of public calamity and general mis-
chief? If such testimony were rejected by
the law, the secrets of conspirators never
coidd be developed, particularly, where they
had skrcened their intentions and dcsigus '
from the prying eye of justice, by the most
solemn engagements of privacy. Gcntlertjen,
how arc such offenders to be brought to pu-
nishment ?— You cannot expect that men of
respectable character could be acquainted with
such schemes, or able to give evidence of them.
The law only requires that the best evidence
which the case admits of shall be given. Law-
ler was certainly a particeps criminiM with the '
rest of the party, but when he came ac-

3uainted wtth the monstrous extent of their
esigns and the diabolical plans in agitation^
he became appalled with horror, and only
obeyed the dictate of his conscience in disco-
vering the plot. Thus, gentlemen, he has
been made the providential instrument of
frustrating this diabolical project, which if
left undiscovered for a few weeksl longer
would have prevented the possibility of a jury,
sitting in that box this day, to discharge the
most inestimable privilege of our happy con-
stitution.
BbX, gentlemen, it has been said tlial The

383] S6 GEORGE III.

leBtimony of Lawler is unsupfMorled — it is no
such tjiiojg ? — It has bcca consistent and cir-
cumstantial, as well now as upon the former
trials. — His testimony is uncontradicted— not
a single witness has been adduced to contra^
diet any one fact stated to have passed at any
of the various meetings, at dinerent places,
and at different times. He has uniformly
told the same story, except as to the design
upon the chanceflor, which was brought out
upon the cross-examination, and in every
point where the magistrates and the officers
of justice have been concerned, his testimony
is fully corroborated down to the finding of
the same identical oath and catechism in the
fob of the prisoner. The ingenuity of the
prisoner's counsel in the course of a very long
cross-ezamixiation, has not been able to warp
the witness into the slightest prevarication,
and no attempt has been made to prove the
contrary of what he has related. He has given
the prisoner ample opportunity of doing that,
if it were in his power, by mentioning the
places where they met — It has not been at*
tempted. But, gentlemen, it is said, that
Lawler's testimony was rejected and disbe-
lieved by a former jury.— That, gentlemen, I
cannot admit to be the fact; for it might be
perfectly consistent for the very same jury to
acquit Leary upon the evidence given against
him by Lawler, and to find the prisoner now
at the bar guilty upon the evidence of the
same witness. The jury in the former case,
ihieht have had some doubt as to the crimi-
natitv of the man — it did not appear poftVtt«/v
that he was present when any oath was ad^
ministercd, and if the jury had any scruples
in their minds, so as not to be perfectly satis-
fied of his guilt, it was their duty to acquit.
But, gentlemen, what room is there for doubt
in the present case ? The actual administra-
tion or the oath has been proved, and that
very same oath has been found in the pri-
soner's possession.

Mr. Prime Sergeant then commented very
fully upon the facts given in evidence, the
treasonable nature of tne oath, and the zealous
activity of the prisoner, from which he in-
ferred that no doubt could remain of his
euilt. But, however, if, notwithstanding, they
had any reasonable doubt, such as rational
men could entertain, it would be their duty to
acquit the prisoner.

SUMUIKG VP,

Earl of C/9R9ire/c-Gentlemen of the Jury ; If
I felt the smallest difficulty upon the whole of
the merits of this case, in proceeding to deliver
my opinion upon it forthwith, I would adjourn
the Court for a short time, or until the next
day, in order to take time to consider of it ;
but, gentlemen, I do not feel any such diffi-
culty ; such adjournments, indeed, have taken
place in another country^* but it is a prece-
dent which I must confess, I do not much

* See the case of Crossfield, anU, p. 91.

Trials of the Defendert-^

[S84

approve ; and in prestdine upon criminal trials.
I will never, so long, as I am able to sit, ana
my brother judges are able to ajssist me, ad-
journ the Courty until the issue be finally dis-
posed of.

Gentlemen, the indictment which you are
now to try is founded upon the statute of
Edward 3rd— a statute which has been en-
joyed by the happy constitution of these
realms for seven hundred years, and which,
for one hundred years past it has not been ne-
cessary to call into execution in this kingdom.
Gentlemen, it may be necessary to state to
you, what tlie accusation is not, in order to
aisembarrass your minds from the represenla^
tion of counsel. This is not a charge of felony,
under the White-boy act — it is not a charge
for levying war to pull down enclosures— it is
not a charge against the prisoner for having
in his possession unpublished papers —it is
not a charge for a tumultuous rising, or of
merely assembling with Defenders to com-
mit robbery or burglary— it is not a charge of
merely taking, or administering illegal oaths
—but, gentlemen, it is an indictment of high
treason, founded in the statute of Edward
3rd, and it charges the prisoner with asso-
ciating himself with divers/ai!se traitort, sty-
ling tliemselves Defenders, and combining
and conspiring with them to aid and assist
the persons exercising the powers of govern-
ment in France, at open war with the
king, for the purpose of overturning, by
force, the king's government in this coun-
try, in church and state, thereby adhering to
the king's enemies, and compassing and ima-
gining tne king's death. For, gentlemen, it
has been truly stated by the learned officer of
the crown who opened the case fur the prose-
cution, that any adherence to the king's ene-
mies at open war with his majesty, for the
I purpose of^ aiding or assisting them against
lis majesty, necessarily, in its obvious conse-
quences involves the safety of the king's life
and the existence of his government Conse-
quently, gentlemen, he who is guilty of the
one is, by necessary implication, guilty of the
other. Therefore it is not necessary that
there should be a direct attack upon the king's
person, or an actual levy of troops to carry on
rebellion, in order to support this indictment ;
for if a combination, or conspiracy for the
purpose, existed amongst his m^esty's sub-
jects, and if it can be established by overt acts
committed by them, the charge will be thereby
as fully substantiated as if the most mahcious
purpose of such a conspiracy had be^n perpe-
trated and completed. Gentlemen, the
safety of the state and the constitution itself,
is inseparably connected with the safeU of the
king, who is the first soldier and the urst ma-
gistrate of the state, and therefore the law,
wisely considering the importance of his in-
valuable life to the peace and existence of so-
ciety, has guarded even the most distaot af>-
proaches towards the safety of that life, with
the mofl scrupulous caution ; for, gentlemen.

SS5]

Thomas Kennedy Jar Hi^ Treason,

A. D. 1795.

[38(5

this is theonly instance in which the policy of
our laws takes the intention of guilt, mani-
fested bj plain, unequivocal overt acts, as
adequate to the completion of the crime, and
inflicts the punishment accordingly for such
«riroiaal intehtion. Having thus stated the
law arinng upon the case, as far as it occurs
lo me to be necessary, I shall next proceed to
consider the charges stated in this indictment,
and the evidence wliich has been adduced in
support of them.

[Here his lordship ' stated the overt acts
enumerated in the indictment, and then re-
capitulated, from his notes, the whole of the
evidence.!.

His lordship afterwards stated it as his opi-
nion, thalall the circumstances separately and
cellectivelv considered, iliowed that a con-
nexion with, and adherence to the French Con-
vention, was theunquestionable purpose of De-
landerisro, for the end of assisting the French in
aay invasion of this country, and overturning
the government of it; and the guilt of these de-
signs, if the jury believed the testimony of Law-
ler, was clearly brought home to the prisoner at
the bar. Gentlemen, the next object for your
consideration will be, the evidence of that
witness. How does it appear ?~^ertainly,
act as that of an approver, as has been re-
pivseBled by the counsel; he stands upon
ywty different grounds. An approver, gentle-
mtn, is a man who, upon being apprehended
and charged with a crime, was encouraged by
the offer of a pardon, to disclose his crime and
prosecute his accomplices. Gentlemen, is
4hat the case of Lawler?— Certainly not.
Was he apprehended upon a charge of any
ctlmef-'^o. • Was he offered a pardon? —
No. lAA he prosecute his accomplices out of
A aeotflsily to save his own life ?— No. Was
«here any thine to prevent his escape from
justice, if he cnose it, without making any
'diacoveiyl-rNo. Had he any «nalice to the
prisoner — Was there any dispute between
themf— -Nothing «f tlie IciBd was attempted
to be proved. Tne testimony of the witness
tinw^hout was clear, collected, and cpn-
aiMcat, without any prevarication. It was
cifcumstaatially supported by the testimony
«f alderm^li James and Mr. Carleton, and so
ftr fipsro biiine contradicted by the evidence
-eiamined on &e part of the prisoner, it was
alrengthened in several respects. So far as
the evidence for the prisoner went, it exactly
tallied and indented with the account given
ligr Lawler > bat what amounted to very strong
presumptive proof, in 9up]Hirt of Lawler, was,
-that oetwHhstaiiding the various meetiags
fai^eulaTized by him at Plunket-street, at
I>rui7-]ane, at Stone^rbatter, at Cork- street,
not a singletiltle of evidence appeared to show
that the prisoner was not at any of those
iDoetings— nor did any of those persons stated
to have been present at those meetings with
the prisoner and Lawler appear to contradict
liim. Bo that, gentlemen, comparing the
arholc ot Lawler^s evidence with all the o^er

VOL. XXVI.

evidence which appeared in the course of the
trial, the]f indentea with each other so closely
and consistently, without any thing to contra-
dict them, that if you believe the evidence,
you cannot hesitate to conclude that the in*
dictment has been fully substantiated.

Gentlemen, the counsel for the prisoner
have endeavoured t6 excite vour humanity, in
favour of the prisoner's youth. Humanity, no
doubt, is a commendable virtue ; but, gentle-
men, the attribute of mercy belongs not to a
jury, when justice requires a verdict upon
your oaths, according to the evidence. If the
youth of a criminal were to warrant a jury in
finding a verdict against evidence,, the most
desperate conspirators against a state will have
notoing more to do, than to engage the boys
of a country in their pl\>ts, and if tliey be de-
tected before the accomplishment of their pur-
pose, the humanity of a jury is to intervene,
and to screen them from public justice. Gen-
tlemen, there is an instance in the conduct of
the great Judge Foster, who was styled an
humane judge, worthy of your attention. A
boy of only seven years old, was tried before
that judge, for murder. It appeared that the
boy bad been entrusted with the care of a
child somewhat younger than himself, and
upon a quarrel arising, he had killed the child ;
scnMble of his crime, and apprehensive of
detection and punishment, he concealed the
body in a duog-hill. Some suspicions arisine
frpro the account he gave respecting the child,
the boy was locked up in a room until he
should tell the truth : at the end of two days,
he acknowledged the murder, and discovered
where he had hid the body. He was tried, and
his years were urged in his defence. He was
certainly of very lender years ; but the learned
itidgcobserved, t^at his hiding the body, and
his prevarica^pn in the account he gave, all
marHed his sense of the wickedness of the
crinie*-^The juir copvicled;him— he was not,
indeed, executed, but respited from time to
tiqe, until at length he died in prison.* —
Now, gentlemen, U* in the present case, you
believe that the prisoner at tne bar is so young
or so silly, a^ not to understand what he was
about in the pmceedinss^^rged and proved
^gainst him; or that na was cajoled or en-
ticed to swear oaths, and administer them to
others, and to attend meetings of Defenders,
for the purpote of seizing arms to assist the
French, and all this through mere simplicity,
inadvertence, or ignorance of the guilt ; there,
to be sure, his youth would deserve consider-
ation. But this it is scarcely possible to con-
ceive. Youmustjtherefore, gentlemen, throw
all false and partial considerations out of your
minds— you must arm your judgments with

♦ See Yorke's case JW. : 70 ; Mr. Justice
Foster's report differs in. some respects from
the account here given hy lo/d Clonmell.
That Yorke's is the case to which lord Clon-
mell alludes, I infer from an expression of
Mr. Lysaght in the ca% of Hart ir^rd, p. 400^

8 C

387]

S6 GEORGE lU.

manly Coelings^ and if you have 19^ doubu
such as rational men may entertain, you will
do your duty like conscientious men, and find
the prisoner guilty. But if, on the contrary,
^ou should entertain such a reasonable doubt,
It will be of course your duty to acauit him.—
The verdict will be yours, not tnat of the
Court; and upon your consciences it will rest
Mr. Justice Chambertain^ and Mr. Baron
George, declined adding any observations to
the jury.

Trials o/ihi Dtfenden^ [968

About two o'clock in the momtiMt of Ih6
83rd, the Jury retired, and aAer delmeratiDjc
for twenty mmutes, brou^t ia ^ verdict m
Guilty; but recommended the prisoner as an
object of mercy, on account of.nb youth.

The Court then adjourned to ten o'clock on
Wednesday rooming.

[The farther proceedings will be found at

the conclusion of the next trial.]

616.

Proceedings on the Trial of Patrick Hart* for
Treason, before the Court holden under a Commission
of Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on Wednesday
February 24th : 36 George III. a. d. 1796.t

Wedneiday, Fehruary S4.

Patrick HJRTwasthisday put uponhis
trial uDon an indictment similar to that which
bset forth in the case of Thomas Kennedy t
and therefore it is thought unnecessary to
state it particularly.

The following jury were sworn, viz.

N. Trumbull, jun.
William French^
"William Lancake,
Thomas White,
George Pillsworth
John Ferns,

Francis Kirkoatrick,
Thomas Black
George Simpson
Matthew Nuon,
J. Hawthorn Grier,
John Thompson,

Note. In swearing the jury, several chal-
lenges were taken on the part of .the
prisoner, for wfani of freehold. Some
doubt was entertained, whether this was
a good cause of challenge in the ciN of
Dublin. The attorney jgeneral decfined
making anypoint^or areuing the objection,
and the Court directed the persons chal-
lenged to be sworn, to answer whether
they had freeholds in the city, and such
as answered in the negative were not
sworn upon the jury.

Mr. Solkitor General, — My lords, and gen-
ilemen of the jury, though called on at the
instant to state this case, I will noV make an
'. idle affectation ofbeing unprepared,' Instead
. of forgetting at this time, so soon after the
late trials on the same subject, I doubt whe-
ther I ever shall forget the important facts,
which this trial, like the former will produce.
. They are not novel to me, though they must
again be explained to you — but conscious as I

* See the preceding cases.

t Taken by William Ridgeway, esq. Barns-
tier at Law.

+

See it anU

am of the extreme fatisue which yoiir lord-
ships have already un£lrgone, I sludl endea*
vour to bring the case within as narrow a
compass as possible.

It is verv likely, eentlemen, that you may
have heard a great oeal before you came into
the box ; but I will caution you not to sufier
your minds to be influenced by any thing but
what shall appear on the present trials in evi-
dence upon the several charges in this very
serious accusation against the prisoner. Gen^
tlemen, the indictment is of considetable
leneth. It has been deliberately and correctly
reaiT by the officer. Therefore, it is only ne^
cessary for me. in order to direct your atten-
tion,-to state, that notwithstanding the length
ofthecharee and the difficulty that might
apparently oe attendant upon an investiga-
tion of an indictment of such long and con^
plicated formation, the case may be simplified
to two charges, which if proved will bear
upon the prisoner.

Gentlemen, under that remarkable statute
of 25 of Edward the tbird,.called the statute of
treason, which altliough it has been acted
upon for many centnries in EngLii^d, has not
been brought into familiar notice ifl this coun-
try, till modem times j I say tmder that sta-
tute of Edward the third, we are now regu-
lated, not only in framing the accusation ia
cases like the present, but we are directed in
the course of evidence necessary to bring home
euilt tothe party accused under that statute,And
by cases solemnly acyudgedupontrialsof a si-
milar nature; true it is, gentleroea. that the
crime of which the prisoner stands anarged is
peculiar in its nat\ire, and different fbora other
crimes known to the law, beosusa imder the
statute which I have mentioned,, the bb.ie
imagining and intending of such criflM as is
alluued to, is the completion of the wme, if
that intent be manifested by overt acts laid in
the indictment, and sufficiently established by

t

aB9]

P(arkk Hart for High Trttuon.

A. J>. 1796.

[390

•evidence witiMi the •tmtute.— OenUemen it is
uoDeoesaery for me to labour the pdnt to
showy oily that in order to bring the person
^diargied under one head of the treason chaig-
ed, namely, that of adhering to the kinrs
enemies— that if the party accused can he
ahewtt lohave so far seconded the endeavour
of the ^ingfs enemies, at open war with the
Inngy in such manner as to nave invito them
to invade the kingdom^to have associated
wuh others, and enlisted men to raise an arm-
od force, to second the invaders, when they
should arrive— it is settled law, that such a
xase will not only go to establish the treason
of adhering to the king's enemies, but will in
its consequences go to prove the other charge
'Of compassing the kind's death — because the
enemies of the king being invited to invade
the ktniglom with an armed force, and a force
being raised here with a view of forwarding
their purposes, to dethrone the kingand over-
turn nis government — ^that necessarily calls
4ilter it the death of the king, under whose
auspices as head of the state, and as supreme
ciecutive aiagistrate, this constitution and
goyenmentis pneserved, and we possess and
-enjoy our liberties and existence.

So much, I should hope, will be enough, as
40 the general heads of the accusation. But
in order to esti^lish those general heads of
accusation, it has been necessary also to lav
oertain overt acts — eight of which are set forth
in the indictment, in order to bring home
guilt to the prisoner at the bar. Ut these
overt acts, gentlemen, the one to which I
shall direct your attention in the first in-
stinoe, is that of associatine with a body of
snen called Defenders — confederated together
with an armed force to second the invasion of
the French, at open war with the king ; and in
ease tliejr shcnda invade this kingdom to for-
ward their attempts in overturning the estab-
lished government of the country. — Another
distinct overt-act is that of enlisting certain
persons to promote that first purpose I have
aientioned, and is a necessary corollary to it,
^y which leading primary intention, both are
connected and combined for the purpose stated
m the indictment. — AnoUusr overt act to which
I shall direct your attention, is that of ad minis-
tering a4eath,Hirhich oath together with acate-
chism (for I take them togetner as one instru-
ment) upon the face of them, demonstrably
show, that the other purposes and overt-acts
which I alluded to, will rest not merely upon
parol testimony, but will be established by
written and irrefragable proof, so as to give
demonstrable certamty of the great feature
of the case, the decioed existence of a foul
horrible treason, which is the subject matter
of^our inquiry. — Gentlemen, it will establish
this hct beyond controversy, in the first in-
stance, namely, that the treason did exist;
and secondly, that the prisoner participated,
and was an active sharer in the guilt.

You are aware, gentlemen, that in taking
this liae^ I am sboiteningthe course of your

investigation, in order thst your intention may
be compressed as much as possible to this point,
to which the evidence is immediately appli-
cable. I come now, gentlemen, to another
part of the case, and that which falls more
immediately within your province to investi-
cate, and decide upon. — I mean the nature of
the evidence which will be brought forward to
establish the guilt of the prisoner at the Ijar.
— Gentlemen, it will appear to you that this
infatuated and deluded man, and if I am
rightly instrQCted,that (unfortunately) wicked
person at the bar, had his mind so heated, so
perverted, so contaroinsted by the treasonable
pursuits in which he was eneaged, that he
bad confederated himself with that body of
meii called Defenders, who have infested this .
country for four or five years past, under that
particular denomination which has brouglit
shame and disgrace upon this kinedoni— so
that nothing but the wholesome aaminisUu-
tion of justice, can induce any man to reside
here, or ever make vou worthy again to in-
vite straneers to hold commerdal connexion
wjth ^ou,l)y giving stability to your credit or
secunty for the enjoyment of the sweets of
honest industry.— I understand the prisoner
at the bar is nearly connected with people of
business in this metropolis, and has been bred
up to the trade of a skinner. It will be prov-
ed that within this, vour metropolis, there
have existed within this short time past a
number of societies all co-operative to one
abominable mischief:— who through their dif-
ferent gradations of ^ilt, atlast concentred tlie
carryinjg into execution theis wicked and trai-
torous intentions in that body of men called
Defenders, of whom the prisoner was one—-
not a passive member, submitting to the di-
rections of others ; but taking that leading,
decbive and commanding part which b^
longs to a committeeman, and b leader in
their discipline and counsels — an office which
he held under the treasonable sanction of his
eilgagements, formed upon the ^vstematic
planof these societies, confederated for nur-
poscs the most horrid, and most formidabieto
the safety of the community. It will wpear
that this body jo( men, under the combined
efibrts of the -malignant intervention of fo-
reign missionaries^of domestic disaffected
men of the industrious assiduity of persons
engaged for some years past in attempts to
overturn the state, and to bring destruction
upon those men who wish well to the good
order and law of the country.— This unfortu-
nate man at the bar having embarked in the
guilty purposes, and heated ahd inflamed
with alt the abominable mischief growing out
of the circumstances I have mentioned, ex-
erted himself with such activity, as to be en-
titled to that denomination I have stated, that
of a committeeman. It will appear that these
persons called Defenders, of whose confedera-
tion you will have decisive evidence from the
oath and the Catechism, could have nothing
else in view than the object of embodying with

391]

36 GEORGB III.

Trialt of the DeftnderSf^

CS9S

France, and to deluge the tounUy mth Uood
apd confu8ipn«^Tbe oath and the cateehim
^ecially provel it— The asaoeiation net at
several places, they enlisted men under the
perverted sanction of a sacred oath— appeal-
ing to God, and binding tbemseWes by an
en^ement, they laboured most assidiously
to increase their numbers^ they met in se-
veral places — tJtey had their asseni^bliesy
their laws, their courts^maitial and their
comnuttee-oien — subscriiftions of money,
—arms provided by plunaer— and by those
means endeavouring to carry into efiect their
guilty purposes, so as not to leave the possi-
bility of a doubt upon your minds as to the
general intent.

The prisoner Hart appears to have had
more them a common snare, even as a leader
and commitiee*man. The witness who will
be brought forward to support this charge,
hirs been already examined in the course of
flevend trials* The same witness upon whose
testimony the case will princifMdlv turn, vrill
be now brought forwaro, and will prove the
numerous meetings at which Hart attended
that he appeared at the head of some of them
as an authoritative person, aniKmndng to the
whole body, what the cuilty purpose was.
At some meetings pow&r and ammunition
were provided-^Hart will appear to have been
an active man in swearing iiidividuals, one of
whom was reluctant, until he heard the
purpose of the engagement. The meeting at
which that transaction took place was at
Stoneybatter, and there a person was brought
in to be sworn — Hart was priding as a com-
mittee man. He toldthe novitiate, that the
olMectofengagement wasto aid the French
when they would land, and for that purpose
they were to plunder the country of arms to
be prepared for their arrival—you ate, said
Hart to obey all the mandates of the com-
mittee, and to be confederated with us upon
oath which oath he according! jr administered.
Gentlemen, at that very meeting at Stoney-
batter, an engagement was entered into upon
a difficulty appearing whether they were suffi-
ciently armed to go out and plunder. ** You
must go back/' said he, '* and fetch your
arms." Then a delay took nlace,^some did
not return, and it appearing tnere was not a
sufficient number attendmg, Hart called
upon those who were in the room and
desired them to lay their hands upon the
table, and swear by their solemn engagement
to attend the next niebt, to be fully armed for
the purpose of pluncMriog the houses of the
peaceable inhabitants in the confiuca of Dub-
lin. It has appeared, that upon that very
night when the confederation was entered
into, a robbery was committed at a neighbour-
ing bouse, wmch was plundered of arms, and
thosearms werefoundin the possession of Hart^
when he was taken up. Those amis were
plundered for the purpose of assisting the
French, when they should land.
. Gentlemen, there is another alarming cur-

cumitance, which will cone out iti ptoof, and
therefore 1 state it, though I wish to be relieve
ed from the pain of it. It is horriblv inita
lutture, that we do not wish to im^te it to
tho body of the Catholic persuasion; bilt
there have been men abandoned enoof^ to
inflame and exasperate religious prejuoiees
and that wicked principle is imputable 1o the
prisoner, who out of las own mouth must be
judged. It will appear, geiitlemen, thai at one
meetingof Defenaers, associated fortheseriooa
purpose of enlisting, embodyinf^and beoomfaig
formidable by miStaiy array, a conversation
arose, in which the witness wanted to know
all the purposes of the association, whic^
Hart, as a confidential committee man, avow-
ed himself entrusted with — ^upon that ooear
sion Hart told the witness, ** Our inUntiom ig^
to get arm$/rom tkotewho have ihem, md 0fUr
we are thoroughhf prepared^ to manncrt mtd
put to death the Protettanii of the eauniry*
—Here he avowed the oorrid scheme.
Gentlemen. I have thought much upon thia
subject, and I cannot bring my mind to sup-
pose that so atrocious a mSigmty could exist
10 the minds of any body of men^ as a delibe^
rate purpose of murdering their Protestant
brethren, and at this time, when we are re-
ceiving with open arms by every act of kind-
ness and participation of benefit, the whole of
our Roman Catholic fellow christians; yet
some there are, who would make religious en-
thusiasm an excuse for the foulest crimes,
with that horrid malignity with which Hart*a
mind was inflamed and was full. Much in-
dustry has been used to persuade the bLgptted
and uninformed Roman Catholic that bis £-
tuation is such as calls for outrage as justifia-
ble, because that he cannot accomplish aboli-
tion of tytbes and reform in parliament; but
there is no sensible Roman Catholic who
must not be convinced that he is in the full en-
joyment of every blesring which theconstitu*
tion can give ; and that it is high time to
teach the conspirators agunst that constitu-
tion, that every honest'man of^ev^i relieioua

Sersuasion, joins to suppress that spirit of de«
nquency and outrage.
i (jentleroen, I shall now state the papers
verv shortly which were found on the prisoner
and which speak trumpet-tongued to your un-
derstandings. The evidence, if established,r
is in its nature, not fidlible; it consists of
written documents, found in the possession of
the prisoner^ and which are not sulgect to
those objections imputable to evidence of ano-
ther kind, where the fallibitity of memory
could deceive.

One of the papers begins in these words:
'^ I do swear that I will K true and ^thful to
<< the present United Sutes of F. and I.
** and every kingdon now in cfaristimity,
<' as for as in mv power Ues, without huvtinjg
'' iQy soul or bod^r, as long as they prove so
^ to me." Then it goes on, '< And mors I do
** swear, that I will he true to my coraoBittee
'* and brsthers, that is to say, in st^pporttng

Pahick Huftjor Hi^ Tr^oion.

903]

« the right and privileges of the United Stelae
*« of the kiDjgdom now in brotherhood/' —
** More, I swear, that I will not oome as an
** evidence aganm any of mj brothers, in any
** cause whatsoever, except on a court-martiu
*'. held by our coramitteeSy on pun of exclo*
** skm, or death whichsomever is deserving.''
-*The dreadful tendency of those en-
gagements will be matter for your considers^
tioD. These papers were found in the pri-
soner's box— in another box was found a
blunderbuss, and several rounds of ball cart-
ridge, so that he appears to have had arms in
one box, dangerous papers in another, and
ti«ason in his heart. Gentlemen, you will
consider the whole of this case, and if there'
be a binge left to hang a doubt on, I join in
the recommendation to acquit the prisoner.
If you find Lawler the witness, trip or equivo*
cate in any one point or cinramstanee, yva
should never fina the party accused ^ilty.
But, gentlemen, if you find the witness per-
fectly consistent, and if the learned counsel,
whose doty it may be to cross-eiamine him,
cannot, mnder all the advantages of former dis*
quisition involve him in inconsistency, and if
be shall be supported, as I am bold to say he
will be, by a train of oorroboratittg faets which
could not exist were not the principal clMnges
well founded, it then only remains for you to
perform that duty which your country has a
tight to demand at your l»nds; and I trust
trait no coDsidetatibn will warp you from
the important obligation which you are bound
by your oaths, and on your consciences lo dis-
charge.

Wiiiiam Lnokr sworn.— Examined by Mr.

KdU.

[Note. The general tenor of the witness's
testimony being the same as unon the
former cases, it is omitted to avoia repeti-
tion. The additional matter was the pri-
vate conversataon with Hart, .the prisoner,
which was inadmissible evidence as against
the former prisoners.]

He said, he met the prisoner at Nowlan's,
in-Drury-lane— it was on Sunday the S8rd of
August, after tiie meetins at dtoneybatter—
it was a societv of Defenders— ttiere were
more than twelve at the moeting-^it was
about seven in the evening. Thepiisoner
asked witness if Coffey and 1% were not Pro-
testants— ^witness answered, he believed they
were— the. prisoner nid he would aot
ait in company with them; the reasen
the prisoner asked him was, because he
was acquainted with thcnm both.— The pri-
soner asked witness what religion he was off
<— witness answered fie was a Roman— the
reason he smdso was, because Brady Sdd him
when be went lo be sworn, to eay he was a
Roman, for that they had an k>MeGtiOft to
admit Protestants.— Wttneea asked the pri-
soner bis reason for asking the question so
ly times; prisoner said, iiecause he^would

A. D. 1796*

[SM

not sit in company with a Protestant^That
the niffht before, the Defenders were to have
risen, but on account of the harvest not being
got in, it was deferred ; for^^if the the harvest
should be destroyed, they would be starved,
but as soon as it was got in, they would rise
upon the Protestants, and put them to
death, and that the forts WMild be attacked at
the same timo— he meant by the forts,
the diffsMUt gnrriseas in Ireland— The pri-
soner ssdd M would call a committee of
twelve men, and that Lockineton should be
made a prisoner, and they woiSd then consult
what death they woukl put him to, for having
brought Proteatants among them— the priso-
ner was then called to order by Cofiey. who
was in the chair— Coffey wanted to know
what number of Defenders there were in
Dublin, that they might be officered ;— the
reason the nrisoner and the witness were
called to order was, because they were from
the table, and at the window— witness mettlie
prisoner on the following day in the liberty ;
then was a young man with him, who the
prisoner said was a Defender — he shook
nands with the witness, and pressed witness's
hand vrith his thumb, which was a sisn that
he was a Defender ;-^the prisoner asked wit-
ness if he had any ball at home, or if he knew
how to make ball cartridges ; told hlra he did,
and that he had ball at home— nrisoner gave
witness some gun-powder, about naif a pound,
and desired him to make cartridges, and let
him have them in the evening— Witness
asked the prisoner if there were 400 Do*
fenders in Dublin— he said there were 4,000
if they were got together-^they then sepa^
rated, and witness went to Dry's in Cork-
street

The oath and cateohism found upon Ken-
nedy were read, after which the witness said,
he wished to mention something to the
Court. One of the witnesses, said he, who
appeared on the last trial, was the man who
lent me the case of pistols when I went to
the watch«house, and whenlwenttoStoney-
batter.

By the Csiirf .— -What is the name of tha
man P— OaUand of Crane-lane. He lent me
a pistol when I vrent to Stoneybalter.

Who has that pbtol now f— It can be got
by sending for it.

Whereupon the pistol was sent for.

Cross-examined by Mr. lytaght.

. Witness saw another person who came to
discredit his testimony, who did not lend him
a pistol— could hot say any thing of the man
---his wife told him he was the person who
melted down «be bullets— eeuld not say iir.
BobinsoB mtA a gqud man— he used witness
more like a servant than any thing else— was
not taken by htm through charity— las) saw
his father in Eoeland, nis father was not a
member of any of the Corresponding Societies
—witness had been frequently m company
with_the prisoner. It was said at Uoey's-

395] 86 GEORGE IIL

court, vhen they should rise, that the first
persons they should put to death would be
Jackson's jury. There was a society met at
witness's room and at Galland's — Strephon
^Lod witness were the principals who induoed
^em to go there — ^never said there was no
God— Burke waqted the nkembers to believe
there was no saviour — never heard that the
society dissolved in consequence of witness's
blasphemous expressiona, tor he never made
use of any. When the petition of the London
Corresponding Society was refused, some of
them said, they ought to go to the throne
with arms, and have what they wanted. One
Baxter in London, asked witness if he had
room for 100 curms, and if he would meet
some of the members at Turnstile, Holborn,
and learn his exercise, as the Sheffield mem-
bers did. Witness administered oaths to
some people, but they were not little children
—some of them were apprentices— could not
say how old the little boy was that he swore
in CasUe-street — ^was more than ten years of
ag^if he were produced, he might guess
—did not know hb name— the youngest he
ever swore was 17 years of age— it was a rule
not to admit any members under 18— there
was one James Steward, who used to carry
about the books — never swore a boy with a
pistol to his breast— was asked before about
It, but it was not true— witness did venture
to denv it upon a former trial— heard the Te-
legraphic and Philanthropic Societies con-
siMed of 100— could not tell bow many Pro-
testants—there were Protestants and Romans
in the Philanthropic Society — witness used
frequently to work on Sunday— did not attend
obureh, when he thought it no crime to kill
the king^did not so to church at the time
the pistol was firecfinto the Watch-house —
there was an intention of liberating the re-
cruits in a crimping-hottse at the comer of
Bull-alley'— did not know how much bounty
he got, when he enlisted— witness's brother
changed his name to John Wright — ^is now in
Chester — ^witness liked the prisoner as a De-
fender when he belonged to them, never de-
dared, since he was taken up, that he would
rather hang the prisoner than any of them.
The members of the Philanthropic Society
were divided into four divisions, and there
were thirty-five in each divison— did not be-
lieve the prisoner was a member of the Phi-
lanthropic Society. -

Triah qfihi De/enderi^

[896

he saw near 3,000 people, who disused upon
seeing him and the army. Had mformatioa
there was an intention to attack the Castle
and the Bank — had information from Lawler
and other persona — did not take the in-
formation ot those other persons upon oath,
because they did not wish to have their
names made public— their information agreed
with that ^ven by Lawler — Lawler did no(
say, he was obe of the party to attack the
Chancellor.

JPhilip Benfy Godfrey, sworn. — Examined
by Mr. Worthingtan»

Beoeived a warrant from alderman James,
to apprehend the prisoner and several others,
and accordingly went to the House where
the prisoner lived — broke open the street
door with a sledge, went up stairs, found the
prisoner and another boy in bed — took a
paper, or parchment out of the prisoner's
breeches pocket— knew they were his
breeches, from his havine told the witness so
—they were not the breeches whkh the
prisoner put on — found some parchment
and papers in a box in the room — a broken
blunderbuss, and about 20 rounds of ball car-
tridge—witness did not; inquire whose the
box was— nor did he know.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lytaght. '

Did not know of any threat, or promise
held out to the prisoner— *witness did not hold
out anv — ^would not answer for what the per-
sons about the prisoner might have done. —
On the wav to Newgate, the prisoner told the
witnesss, that the breeches were his — he also
said he' was a sworn Defender, but was sworn
by compulsion, and had the parchment forced
upon him — witness did not know, nor could
he form a belief, whether Lawler visited the
prisoner at the house where he lived.

Here the parchment found in the breeches
pocket was read, and was as follows :

*' I, A, B, do in presence of God, swear
of my own free will and accord, that I will
be' true to the United States of F— — and
I and every other kingdom now in'

Mr. Alderman Jame$ sworn. — £xamined by
Mr. Priffie Sergeant.

Granted a warrant against the prisoner,
to Mr. Philip Henry Godfrey, groundea
upon informations from lawler, who gave a
description of the different persons, and where
they would be found.

Cross-examined by Mr. MNally.

Christianity, as far as in my power lies without
hurting my soul or bod v, as long as they prove
so to me : and more I do swear, that I will not
go with any robber or thief, or any person
Uiat is suspected to defame our society in any
character whatsoever, or keep such people
company, if to my knowledge I know it, and
more I do swear, that I will be true to my
committee and brothers, that is to sav, in sup-
porting the rights and privileges of the united
states of the Kingdom now m brotherhood,
or may be hereafter, and that I will not
wrong any of my brothers to the value of dd
sterling, to my knowledge; and more I do
swear, that I will not come as an evidence

August Atkinson was arrested upon the
24t£— witness went to the Liberty, where

1

Took Lawler's examinations on the S7th of against an/ of my brothers in anv cause wbat-

soevelr^ except on a court-martial held by our
committees^ on pain of exclusion or deaths

397]

Patrick Hart for High Treason*

A. D. 1796.

[S98

whichaomever is deserving, and more I do
swear, that I will not strike or ill use a bro-
ther in anv respect ; and that if I see a bro-
ther struck or ill used, I will aid and assist
him as far as in my power lies, if in a just
cause, if to my knowledge he is a brother;
and all brothers is to live lovingly and friendly
together, and to have no quarrels or dis-
putes whatsoever, and he that does, is to be
excluded as long as the committee thinks
proper, and to avoid such things, jrou are not
to play at any sort of earning with any of
your brothers for more tnan nxpence sterling
atone time : and more I do swear, that I wiU
help to support a lawful well inclined brother in
all distresses whatsoever asfa^ as in my power
lies, without hurting myself or my family,
and that I will meet when and where my
committee thinks proper, and spend what is
agreeable to my committee and company t and
tnat monthly or as the committee thinks
proper, and this article is according to the
united states of the kingdom."

Signed by order of of Uie

hold Committe of F. & I.

generation, and by posterity for such decisioa
on cases of singular nicetv and acknowledged
novelty. As to matters of fkct,you sentlemen
of the jury, are to be assisted ana advised,
but by no means governed or controllea
bv their lordships ? the court which I have
the honour to address, will tell you that by
our happy constitution you are to determine
matters of fact, as they are to determine
points of law resulting from, or arising out of
the evidence ; therefore should any judge on
any trial, labour hard for hours, and argue
strenuously to make strong impressions
on your minds, analvzc, sift, doubt, ques-
tion, and consider fully such argumentative
charge-^--and should you feel a different
persuasion from that sought to be stamped
on you — away with all false delicacy and
culpable veneration for the Bench. Judge
for yourselves— prefer your own judgments-
assert and vindicate and maintain the un-
doubted rights of juries. In this respect, I
mean the authority and supremacy (if I may
use the expression) of Junes, the wisdom of
the law h manifest. Judges of the land are
enveloped in abstract studies; their minds
pure and lofty are filled with lucubrations of

Mr. WNally objected to the reading of the
papers found in the box ; they were nut prov- i . - j • «» 4 i *• ^

S to be the orisoner's hand writing nor was ^«»«5n*y yc"«> ^^^ incessant co itemplations,
ea 10 oe uie prisoners nana wmmg, nor was ^ y^^ of science.— You. eentlemen. are
the box proved to be his property. ™: » :lu .u ill !.):' !^ ^ ll-

conversant with the transactions of ordinary

life, and have daily opportunities of reading
every diversified page of human disposition,
habit and character ; and are (I say it with
great respect to the court) more competent
than a jury composed of the twelve judges
could be, to try matters of vulgar incident imd
groveling fact.

Gentlemen, having said thus much, I sliall
concisely and strictly consider the facts which
have appeared in any thing like credible proof
this day against the prisoner at the bar. The
solicitor general who stated the case for the
Crown wit^ great candour, has told you that
the evidence on which only vou should con-
vict the prisoner, ought to be such as could
leave not a hinge to hang a doubt on — the
expression does him honour — ^mect that idea

proved to be his property
The Court said the papers fouud in the box
could not be read.

Oliver Carkim, esq. sworn. — Examined by

Mr. AaxToa.

This witness repeated the testimony he had
given in the former cases.

Evidence for the crown closed.

Defehce.

Mr. Lytashi, — ^My lords, and gentlemen of
the jury, I have been very suddenl}[ called on
to day (as I was also on the last trial^ to de-
fend the unfortunate prisoner at tne bar;
the very able and eloquent advocate, who
had been assigned one of his counsel, bavins
been prevented by avocations elsewhere, I

f»resume, or some other justifiable reasons
irom attending. And I feel this disadvantage
the more strongly, inasmuch as the facts
charged against the prisoner at the hsr, are of
a very dimrent nature firom the facts charged
against those for whom I had been orieinally
assigned counsel. I likewise feel much dis-
couragement in my own mind, and am diffi-
dent of its executions from reflecting that I
have the misfortune to differ in some degree
from the bench, in mv conception, both of
the nature, of the evidence, and the law ap-
plicable to the fiicts which were thought to ,
nave appeared on the last trial— the trial of

Kennciiy*

I feel all due respect for the bench, and
trust Jt is not inconsistent with tha^ sentiment
to say, that their lordships are to fulfil a very
important and awful duty; they are todedide
the law and to be acyudged by the present

gentlemen, and even enlarge by your com-
mentary on it, and add that the doubt should
be a reasonable one— such as a rational mind
should give reception to. — Go thus &r and
regulate your decision by that criterion, and
I trust, that I need ask no more, I trust, that
I shall fill a reasonable mind with rational
doubt as to the prisoner's guilt I shall not
arrogate more to my humble talents, a more
eloquent advocate could illustrate his inno-
cence.

My lords, and gentlemen of the jury, the
unfortutiate child at the bar, is indicted §ot
two species of high treason, for compassing
and imagining the death of the kine, and for
adhering to the king's enemies ; — all of any
thing luce credible evidence to support the
indictment, is a paper siud to be found in the
prisoner's room, importing; that the person
reciting it is to be true to the united states of

399]

36 GEORGE IIL

Trials of the Dejenden

F. and I.--F. and I. are stated bv counsel to
mean France and Ireland. The evidence
which I shall beg leave to call utterly incredi-
ble, is the testimony of Lawier. Now, gen-
tlemen, in my humble apprehension, the
barely having in one's possession, without
publicatboj such a paper as that found in the
prisoners room, is not an overt act of adher-
mg to the king's enemies, the paper contains
no intelligence, there has been no attempt at
proving any intended correspondence or com*
munication with the enemy. — Where do the
prosecutors look for treason in this case they
are driven to explore the foulest place, the
breast of an infamous witness : — exclusive of
the testimony of Lawier, noUiing has appeared
to £x treason or felony under ^the wbtte*boy
acts, or defenderismi ot even sedition^ upon
the prisooer.

The Sdlicitor-geneial, in stating that tiie
prisoner declared to Lawier that his wish and
desii^n ^vas, to massacre all the Protestants,
said It showed such malignity, that he eouhl
not believe it existed in the minds of manjf
men of this country. Merdful Opd, it
6uch a witness as Lawier to be credited
when he imputes such a sanguinary disposi-
tion to any person, to a boy of tender years I
no gentlemen ! Youth is not Uie season when
that depravity seizes the heart. The poor
prisoner must have been a fiend from his
oirth if he harboured such a thought. He
must iiave been suckled by a Tigress Or
Hyena, and have served his apprenticeship
among the canibals in the human butcher's
stall. No gentlemen 1 the wretch who per-
jured himself for the paltry bounty«money
.^iven to recruits, is more likely to invent a
lalsehood under the influence of sanguine
«xpectktion of great reward, than a voung
bo^ of reputable connexionB and good edu-
cation is, to form the horrid scheme of mur-
tlering all the Protestants— *Lawler tokl you
the fmsoner eud he quitted one club because
there were Protestants iu it, yet he shears
the same Protestant^hater got into another
club, in which there were more members
Protestants, than in the former club. Lawier
confessed that he fired a loaded {HStol into a
wmAsh^bouBe fiill of watchmen, and that he
ihot^t it no crime to murder his king.—- Is
it not likely, therefore, gentlemen that this
nefiirkMii wretch, stained with jpeijudcs, felo-
nies and traason»--insatiateorblood like the
Benault of the poet and tiie Rofcespierre of
inhuman neraory-4& it net likely, I say,
that the caitiff who woukl mnrder hi* king m
the speculation of power would invent the
horria tale of intended massacre to ^-
cilitate the mnrder of a subject m tlve
speculation and chance of reward? His
consistency has been mentioned— yea, he is
very consistent; for the printed trials
of Wddon and Leary were probably in
his hand till he came into court— in his
T^erjuries and «[ecnibie treachery* he is Con-
sistent—Weldon is to die, by the evidence

[400

which a jury disregarderl, though it was thus
consistent on the trial of Leary — ^Kennedy
has been convicted by another' jury, (who
(with great respect lor them I say it) possibly
did not reflect that a witness of veracity migh
not be so minute in the detail, so circumstan-
tial and consistentp— in his insatiable thirst
for blood he is consistent— I know not wliat
measure of it will glut him, if you do not act
with caution and mercy. Titusi)ates was not
less consistent-HHumbers of false witnesses
have been as consistent — deluded Juries and
judges have been abused by their apparent
consistency, and numbers of innocent men
have fallen victims to it.

Gentlemen, you are not, I hope, to be mis-
led by any description of tlie distracted state
of the country, to give an unwarrantable, pre^
dpitate verdict of guilty, on a charge of high
treason* If there be Defenders, there are
statutes in force against them amply suflSdent
to curb such offenoes, and the punishment in
many cases of Defenderism is death.-^Witt
you ubel the nation by magnifying outrage,
rioty or fblony into treason ? — Do not preclude
the reformation of the lower classes, hy iafiis-
ine into their minds a distate for our ibvala-
able constitution, which they indubitably will
feel if the administration of justice be not
pure, temperate, and just '

I shall call witnesses of unimpeachable
character to show that Lawier deserves no
credit on his oath in a court of justice. Me
has not particularMed dates ; we therefore can-
not proauce witnesses to prove an a/i&t~ con-
sider, gentlemen, the avowed infamy of thp
witness, and the extreme youth of the priso-
ner—in the case of Wilttam Yorke*,ad verted
to on another trial, the murder 8])oke for it-
.self, and estaolished criminality with a crying
fact-^-but the crime imputed to' the prisoner
ia a crime of intention, the proof of it resting
on the testimony of an inndel felen.-«-Geu-
tlemen, I have done; remember that the God
who gave these favourite kingdoms so blest a
constitution, delights' not in human sacrifices.

William R0chfort, sworn.— Examined by Mr.

M'Nulfy.

Knows Lawier six or seven years — bis bro-
ther served his time in the same house with
the witness, and went by the name of Wright,
before he went to Br^jUnd. — ^Witaess never
belonged to any club, or society.

Cross-examined.

Had been summoned to attend the Court —
he attended in consequence of an Indictment
against him, at the suit of John GifiTard, for
publiships a print, entitled, '* Kennelling of
t!he Dog.'^

NiekeloM CUtrt sworn.

«

Gave Uie same evidence as in the former

* Quoted in the preoediiig case by the earii
of Cbnmell ; see p. 36$»

401]

Patrick Hari/or High Treasoti4

A. D- 1796.

[4(W

William Ebbi sworn.

Gave the same evidence as in former ctse.

Mr. M^Naiiy. — My lords, and gentlemen
of the jury, it is not usual for counsel to have
permission to address a jury, on matter of
evidence, or even to state a case in the de-
fence of a man on the trial of bis life for a ca-
pital crime ; for so rieid is the ancient rule of
the common law, toat except on collateral
points of law, the Court never assigned coun-
sel. But the legislature, gentlemen, has by
a humane and indulgent statute in favour of
the people relaxed that rigour, and has ^iven
to a prisoner, who is charged with the crime
of high treason, a privilege to demand the aid
of counsel, who are in such cases assigned by
the Court. It is by the authority of that sta-
tute, sentlemen, that I now have the honour
of addressing you on the part of the prisoner
at the bar. But, gentlemen, I have to regret
that the act to which I have alluded, has not
in every particular and provision followed the
wholesome English statute for regulating
trials for high treason, of which it is but
oierely a short abridgment ; for if the Irish
act had followed the English statute,! should
not now have had any occasion to address
you on the part of the unfortunate youth
standing at the bar ; for, by the English sta-
tute it is provided, that in all cases of high
treason, where corruption of blood is the colo-
sequence of a conviction, there can foe no ver-
^ct of guilty, unless there be at least two wit-
nesses produced by the crown to support one
overt-act of treason, or one witness to one
overt- act, and a second witness to another
overt act of the same species of treason, so
that in the present case, if the English statute
had been fully adopted, by the Irish legisla-
ture, the prisoner at the bar must be acquitted
in point of law, as there is but one witness
produced to support the overt-acts of treason
charged against him in the indictment. GocI
forbw ! gentlemen of the jury, that I, or any
Irish lawyer should dare to insinuate that
English statutes should have authority in
Ireund, without tlie sanction of the Irish par-
liament. But principle is immutable ; prin-
ciple is the same in both countries, and I trust
I nave a right to tell you, that in considering
your verdict this day, it will be your duty to
apply the principle of English jurisprudence
to the present case. A great and a learned
writer has laid down the principle*, that makes
two witnesses necessary in cases of high trea-
80if. Gentlemen, I will give you his ^'ords:
He saysy ** In cases of treason, there is the ac-
cused's oath of allegiance to counterpoise the
information of a single witness, and thai may
perhaps be one reason why the law requires a
double testimony to convict him :" though,
^' the principal reason/' continues the learned
commentator, *< undoubtedly is, to secure the
subject from being sacrificed to fictitious con-
a^racies which have been the engines of pro-
ibgate and crafty politicians in all ages.*' —

VOL. XXVL

Gentlemen, I do not mean to apply the words
'* cmfiy politicians'' in the same manner they
are applied by the learned judge, whose words
t have just quoted. I do not mean to apply
them to any ofthe persons carrying on the
btisiness of government in this country. No,
gentlemen, the <* crafty politician," whom I
intend to make the object of your serious con-
sideration, as I am well convinced he ti of
your abhorrence, is Mr. William Lawler, the
witness who has this day made his fourth ap^
pearance in this court Gentlemen, it 43
clear that he is the ** crafbr politician," who
was well versed in acts of deceit before he left
England. It was there he became tutored in
vice, it was there he noviciated in the acts of
hypocricy and dissimulation^ and from thence
he returned into this^ his native country, a cor-
rupter of our unsuspecting and unwary youths.
Like Satan who scaled the gardens of Eden,
and having instilled the poisons of sin under
the pretence of communicating knowledge
into the ears of innocence, abanooned the de-
luded victims of his diabolical subtilty and de«
ceit, to death and perdition.

Gentlemen, as we have adopted the Eng-
lish constitution, we have a ripbt to decide
upon its principles. In England, one witness^
though immaculate as an angel^ could not
convict a person charged with high treason,
and will you, gentlemen, establisn by a ver-
dict of 2uilty, that in Ireland the tainted
breath ofa fiend, which in England could not
agitate a feather in the scale of justice, shall
start and blast from the face of the earth one
of God's creatures ! It may be asked what
could have been Lawler's motive f I answer^
God, the searcher of hearts, can only know
the motives of this devil, in first seducing his
proselvtes and then betraying them to death.
— He has said, repentance was his motive, but
I rather conceive it arose from the impulse of
fear. Gentlemen, his object for instituting
societies, however, is plain. — ^The Bank was
one of his objects— so says aldennan James^
could he have but persuaded those whom he
had seduced to have assisted him in plunder*
ine the Bank, his object would have been ful*
filled, and under another fictitious name he'
would have fled elsewhere to enjo}r his plun-
der, and meditate on fresh enormities.

Gentlemen* permit me to trespass a little
further on your indulgence— permit me to so*
licit your serious attention to Mf. William
Lawler the prosecutor, and to the prisoner.
In the one you see an adept in wickedness,
which could only result from a polluted heart
and spotted souf. In the other you view a
boy, who from his youth mast appear to yoii
a novice in politics and in ofienccs — and if
you should believe, that he has been misled
and fallen into error, surely you will not visit
the sins ofthe seducer upon the head of the
seduced — I will venture to argue, geutleiuen,^
that from legal principle yoq ought not. —
Gentlemen, you nave heard tlic confesbiu*
made by Mr. Lawler the witness; what c^th

403]

36 GEORGE III.

Triak (iflhe Offenders-^

I'M

essions have you heard him make F-^ You
have heard him confess to the commission of
felonies, of conspiracies, and of penuries.
Now, gentlemen, I maintain, that by the law
ofthe land, if Lawler had been convicted of
even one felony, one conspiracy^ or one per-
jury, by producing the^ record of conviction of
either of those crimes, the Courf would be
hound to prevent him from giving evidence
on the ground of incompetency arising from
infamy— andVou would be bound to acquit
"the prisoner for want of evidence. Compe-
tdncy is a Question of law, it is to be deter-
mined by the Court, but after the Court have
determftied upon the competency, and the
witness is sworn, then arises the question of
credit, and that question depends solely on
the determination of the jury. — From these
premises I draw conclusions^ which I submit
to your deliberation. I submit that every
juror amongst you must from the perception
of your own reason, consider Lawler in no
other lidit than as a convict — ^you must from
the evidence of your own senses, for you saw
and you heard him, consider him as convicted
on his own confession, the strongest evidence
the law knows, when applied against the party
Confessing, though the weakest and most sus-
picious when made use of against a second
person. I say, that Lawler, on his own con-
fession, stancb a convict before you of one fe-
lony in attempting to murder a watchman,
by discharging a loaded pistol into the watch-
Housc — of one conspiracy to murder the lord
chancellor — and of one other to murder a
witness who was to give evidence on the part
of the Crown. — Perjuries are also recorded in
the black schedule of his crimes, and of those
you are also in possession by the strongest
proof possible — his own confession. If then,
gentlemen, you believe this witness guilty of
those crimes which he has himself confessed,
does he not stand before you as a convicted
ftlon, and of course as infamous and as vil-
lainous as if he had been regularly tried and
found goilty by any other jury ? — I repeat
it, gentlenMin, if this miscreant had been con-
victed by another jury, you, gentlemen of the
jury, could not this dav have heard his testi-
mony, the law would have arrested his evi-
dence, for the Court could not legjall;^, and
therefore would not have submitted him to
Bave undergone an examination ; and I say,
it follows ofcourse, that if you are bound to
hear his testimony, he not being an incompe-
tent witness, yet you are also bound to reject
his evidence, ne not being worthy of credit ;
for the same principle that rules the Court on
the question of competiency, should from ana-
logy and principle, rule the judgment of a
jury on the question of credit

Gentlemen, three witnesses have been pro-
duced on the part of the prisoner, and they,
iVom a knowledge of the general character of
Mr. Lawler the witness, from a knowledge of
his impietv and immorality, have positively
deposed^ that he is a man of so infamous a

diaracter, that he ought not to liftvc credit on
his oath, giving evidence in a court of justice
Gentlemen, an attempt has been made by the
counsel for the crown, to impeach the testi-
ittony of those witnesses ; it nas been showo
on a cross-examination, that one of them was
a member of the Telegraph society at a time
when its purposes were merely confined to
reading— but does that affect his credit ? or if
it did, are there not twelve other witnesses
who do not belong to any society, well ac-
quainted with Lawler's general character and
infamy ? Gentlemen, the twelve witnesses I
speak of, are yourselves. Gentlemen, let me
in treat of you when you retire from your box
to deliberate on your verdict, to ask each other
whether this fellow is not of a most infamous
character? whether you have not full evidence
before you from out of his own mouth, of his
infamy, and whether you, as jurors upon vour
oaths, with the interna knowledge pf his
guilt in your minds, can give credence to the
testimony of so abandoned, so infamous, and
so impious a wretch upon his oath ?

Gentlemen, you have heard a great deal of
the consistency of this witness. My learned
friend Mr. Lysaght, has niade several pointed
and judicious animadversions on this subject,
I shall therefore only trouble you with one or
two more. From what cause does this con-
sistency proceed ? Is it the emanation of a
cool, collected, ingenuous, and virtuous mind t
No ! an honest man in giving evidence to af-
fect tlie life of his fellow creature, to affect
the life of a boy, whom he had described as
having been once his confidential friend, would
evince compunction and feeling, he would

five his eviclence with trembling and appre-
ension, he would not have shown a prompti-
tude to answer, an eagerness to explain and
connect, arising from a pre- determined inten-
tion to convict. Gentlemen, the witness is
well experienced and perfect in the part he
has this day acted on the table. He has
been examined on the different trials, these
trials have been printed — he has read them
with attention, he has studied his vade
mecum of evidence, and now comes into court
fully instructed and prepared from his printed
briefs. I will now show you iii what Mr.
Lawler has not been con»stent. He has sup-
presssed and he has extended his evidence to
answer his views. He has this day cone farther
before the Court, than he ventureato gpwhen
he gave his informations before Mv. alderman
James, he on that occasion, suppiessed the
intended assassination of the lord chancellor,
he suppressed the intended assas^nation of
Cockayne, and would itill, no doub^ have
suppressed his knowledge of those diai>olical
conspiracies, if I had not extorted' a confes-
sion from him on his cross-examinat^)n oh a
former trial. Gentlemen, his suppression of
dates is most material, for except in one in-
stance, this wiinesss of extraordinary memory
has recollected but one date. The intent of
this cunning is manifest— had he sworn to

4ei}

_ *

Patrick Haft for High Treuion,

A. D. 1796.

[too

dates the prisoner might have proved an
alibiy that is, sentlemen, he might have
showa that on the day sworn to by the wii-
aessy he, the prisoner, was in another place,
but the witness by artfiiHy omitting, the day,
has precluded the prisoner from defending
himself from any char^ depending on time or
locality.

It 18 unnecessary for me, gentlemen, to
engage your time by entering at large into the
law of the case, the Court will fully instruct
you on that head, but the determination lies
with yourselves, for I venture to say, that no
lawyer will controvert the rieht of the jury to
^termiseDnthc law as well as en the fact in
a criminal case ; to take both together into
their consideration, to determine upon both
together, and to found their verdict on both
16 the established and indubitable right of a
jury. This leads me, gentlemen, to take a
alight view of the indictment, in doin^ which,
I shall anticipate an observation, that may
he probably made this day, because it was
maae by the counsel for the crown on a for-
mer occasion, and the case of doctor Hensey,*
as convicted in Xondon for high treason, was
mentioned to support it.

Gentlemeti, the indictment which you have
heard read, and on which you are to decide,
consists of two species of high treason. It
first charges the prisoner with compassing the
death' of the king ; and secondly, it charges
him with adhering to the king's enemies. As
to the first charge, I conceive it has not been
supported. i\nd, as to the second, as I pre-
sume the counsel for the crown rel^ upon it,
to it alone will I call your attention. The
overt-acts in this species of treason to be found
hx the books, are these : giving intelligence to
the enemy; selling them provisions; selling
them arms, or surrendering to them a fortress.
In every trial I have seen on this species of
treason, there has been evidence of a con-
nexion, a reciprocity between the parties
charged as traitors and the enemy, but ;^ou
have not had a scintilla of evidence laid before
you to show the slightest communication be-
tween the prisoner, or between the persons
denominated Defenders and the kin^s ene-
mies, ** the persons exercising the powers of
government in France," nothing even like
agencies has been given in evidence. In
Florence Hensey's case, quoted by the chief
justice on a former trial, there was actual
evidence given of his correspondence with a
minister of France. In De la Motto's case,*
It was proved, that through the medium of
agency be communicated intelli^i^nce to the
enemy, and in that case it was said, that the
prisoner by entering into a conspiracy to send
mtelligence to the French, was not guilty of
high treasoBj but that the intelligence which
was sent must be laid before tlic Court by le-
gal evideqee.<^Now, here the evidence goes

* See it, anl?, Vol ID, p. 1341.
t fleeil^ani^; Vol. 21, p« 687.

no farther than a bare conspiracy. In Jack-
son's case,* recent in every man*s memory,
letters delivered at the Post-office, intended
to be transmitted to foreign parts, containing
a description of the situation of this country
for the use of the enemy, were arrested in
their progress in the Post-office. Gentlemen,
have you any evidence similar to this in the
case hefore you ? No ; in all the above cases
the treason was consummate; in the case
before you, the treason is inchoate. In the
offence of compassing and imagining the
king's death, wise ana eminent lawyers have
certainly held that evitlence of the intent sul>-
stantiated the crime, but no lawyer has as yet
ventured to advance, ttiat an intent to adhere
to the king's enemies substantiated theofi'ence
of high treason ; and, gentlemen, I- do insist,
that should you believe every wordLawler has
sworn, and the construction the king's counsel
has put upon the papers produced an intent
to adhere, or a conspiracy to adhere, and no
more has been given in evidence. I will go
farther; I will venture to maintain, that the
indictment does not charge a substantial trea-
son. Gentlemen, attend tothe overt act : it
charges that the prisoner, in order to enlist
William Lawler, a liege subject of the king,
to be aiding and assisting the persons exer-
cising the powers of government in France,
being enemies, in case thev should invade, or
cause to be invaded, this kingdom, adminis-
tered or cause to be administered an oath to
said lawler, and swore said Lawler to a cer-
tain profession, declaration, or catechism to
the purport followine, &c. Now, gentlemen,
this I say, goes no farther than to show an
intent to commit treason, there is no positive
adherence to the king's enemies shown by
this overt act; no, the worst that is shown is
an intent of conspiring to assist them on the
completion of an uncertain event, the event
of their invading, or causing to be invaded,
this country, an event which, I trust in God,
never will take place, or if such an atte ipt
should be made, that it will be rendered
abortive by the spirit of Irishmen and the
discomfiture of the foe.

As to the iiapers, I am well aware, /ou
will hear much on thehr meaning from the
learned counsel who is to reply on the part of
the crown, but whatever constructions he may
put upon their contents, or wiiatever con-
struction you may apply to them, it will be
your duty to recollect, that they were per-
mitted to be read, not as evidence connected
immediately with the prisoner, but as evi-
dence to show an existing conspiracy, and the
existence of a conspiracy is not of itself legal
evidence of treason or of guilt against the
prisoner ; nor is there any evidence before you
that he had any knowledge of these papers,
they are not offered as being in his hand-
writing, they are not offered as. being found in
his possession, but the pak'chment was found

• AMff Vol. 25 p. 7U3.

4C7]

S6 QE0R6E lU.

Trio/it ^tht Dt^ndert-^

im

in a room wherein Mr. Godfrey, constable of
police* swore the prisoner Uy.— How is that
accounted for? Mr. Godfrey told you he
spoke to him on the subject, and Uiat he had
been sworn by compulsion. If you take what
he said to Godfrey as a confession, vou must
take the whole of that confession, ana in doing
that, you must take such facts and circum*
stances as make for Jbe prisoner as true.
Gentlemen, it must be known to some of you,
that persons of the first character in the
country have been compelled to take the
Defender's oath, at the risk of losing their
lives if they refused, and therefore there can
be nothing fanciful or ridiculous in my assert-
ing that it is not impossible, but the prisoner
was forced against his will to take an oath,
And that at the same time the parchment pro-
duced, was put anto his hand. You must
have observed that Mr. Lawler is blessed with
a most accommodating memory, he can ex-
lend or contract it at pleasure; with the most
extraordinary tenacity he remembers every
conversation he held with the prisoner, not
forgetting a single interrogatory, or answer. I
say, he has a recollection for all occasions to
serve him when necessary, to revive, to come,
to go at pleasure. He perfectly recollects
swearing an infant, but he cannot remember
either his age or name. He perfectly recol-
lects admimsterin» an unlawful oath of se-
crecy to him, but ne cannot remember whe-
ther he administered the oath with a pistol to
the boy^s breast. He cannot recollect whether
this boy was ten or eleven years of age, but
he could tell his age if he saw him, and then,
forgetting this circumstance for the purpose
of injuring the youth at the bar, he cunningly
swears he never administered an oath to a
man of less than seventeen years of age.
Gentlemen, if I do not go fully into this case,
it is not from want of zeal or attention to my
client; this is the fourth time I have had oc-
casion to address a jury on the subject of Mr.
Lawler and his enormities. The human mind
becomes laneuid by repeatedly thinking on
the same suBject, and when the subject is
like the present, the mind becomes disgusted.
Indeed, gentlemen, I had forgot this is the
first time I have had the honour of addressing
yt)u, and from an apprehension of wearying
your patience, shall probably leave uaob*
served, many material points. But. gentle-
men, I feel consolation, when I look to that
bench, because I know the great and enlight*
encd characters who preside there will not
leave untouched an iota of evidence, that has
appeared to them favourable to the prisoner,
but will address you in a mild and constitu-
tional charge. Gentlemen, judges are the
representatives of his majesty, and in the dis-
charge of their judicial duties, will follow that
sacred obligation which his majesty enters
into with the people, when he assumes Uie
reinsof executive government ; I allude to the
coronation oath, bv which the father of his
people swears and undertakes to administer

" justice in mercy." He is the fountain of
mercy, and the mandate of his divine attri-
bute should flow throueh the bosoms of every
magistrate acting nnder his delegated au«
thority.

The Solicitor-seneralyin a strain of candor
which does that Teamed advocate much ho*
nour, ui^ed an observation, that I trust ia
strongly impressive upon your minds, he told
vou emphatically, '< If there be an hinge lefi
by the witness to turn a doubt upon, you
oueht to acquit,'' and, gentlemen, the bench
win lay down the same rule when they come
to give their charge. They will tell you thai
no man ought to be convicted in an Irish
court of justice on facts which are notindubi-.
table. Where the witness is weak, there
must be a doubt, and where there is a doubt
there must be an acquitta] : such, gentlemen,
I say, is the merciful rule of the criminal law
in this country, that though the conduct of
a party accused, even of the most heinous of-
fence, should not appear perfectly innocent,
yet he is intitled to a verdict of acquittal, for
if tliere be a doubt on the minds of the jury,
this benign rule of clemencv becomes impe-
rative, and you will implicitly submit to its
authority, for there is an old and wise maxim,
better that ninety and nine guilty men should
escape punishment than one innocent man
suffer. Gentlemen, I shall here conclude,
imploring vou to take into your consideration,
that thouen you should acquit the prisoner in
error, and hereafter make the discovery, as
tliat error will be founded on mercy — mercy
originating with God and constituting the b^
nign prerogative of the crown— the discovery
wul neither disturb your sleep, nor injure
your waking moments, you will lie down in
comfprt, you will rise with chearfulness, you
will walk abroad in peace with placid con-
sciences.—But, gentlemen, should you con-
vict in error, how would your hearts feel here-
after, how would your minds suffer from such
a horrid discovery ? Would not appalling fear
shake every nerve, would not bitter remorse
and repentance be the consequence when you
heard the voice of an innocent victim in the
language of the scripture, shrieking from the
grave, '* Oh! earth cover not thou my
blood ?"

Gentlemen, one observation more as to
what has fiillen from the counsel for the
crown. It has been asked, and the question
conveys a strong conclusion should it go un-
answered— it is asked who so likely to give
information of treasons as a traitor ? — I answer
with another question — who so likely to swell
minor offences into crimes of the first magni-
tude as the traitor who, with reward in view,
insinuates himself into the confidence of
others, for the purpose of making the betray-
ing of their secrets or tlie TOvenlion of
chimerical conspiracies, the means of en-
suring that reward } Gentlemen, such a wretch
as Lawler.

Mr. Sauria.^'iAy lords, and gentlemen of

400J

Patrick Harijor tilgh Treason.

A. D. 1796.

[410

Xh% jury.—Thss in truth is so plain a case^
that it will be unnteeuarv for me to
take up much of your time. Gentlemen, the
prisoner at the bar stands indicted for hi^ch
treason, the indictment contains two species
of that offence, namely, compassing the king's
death, and adhering to Uie kmg's ene*
niies. With respect to the first, you have
been already told, that it need not occupv
much of your atteatiou, because if you shall
be satisfied from the evidence you have
heard, that the prisoner adhered to the
enemies of the king, at open war with the
king, tiiat will support the second chartein
the indictment, and will also be evidence
of the first, that of compassing the king's
death.

Mr. Saurin then observed upon the evi-
dence, and contended that however criminal
Lawkr might appear, bis Jptimony was so
consistent aad so corrob^mted by circum-
staocea which could not be controverted, that
the inference of the prisoner's guilt became
irreaistible.

[These points being fully observed upon by
the Bench, will apologize for not giving
Mr. Saurin's argument at length.]

Earl of Ci^Miie//.— Gentlemen of the Jury ;
Patrick Hart, the prisoner at the bar, stands
chai^ with high treason on two distinct
species of treason, ascertained by the statute
S5 Edward Srd.— This is a statute which has
not been passed in the heat of tumultuous
times, or the ardour of irritated contention —
it is a part of the constitution which, while it
defends the prerogatives of the crown, and
protccta the safetv of the royal person, is a
shelter to the liberties of the sulyect, by
statins with clearness and with eaution, what
acta shall be considered high treason : not
leaving it to tyranny or capnce, to assume to
itself as in other countries, to deliver a di»-
tinct opinion on vague and uncertain charges,
in order to lay the ground-work of the de-
struction of individuals in consequence of the
constitution not having been explicitly de-
fined.

The first species of treason with which he
k charged is, having compassed the king's,
death on the days and at the places set
lorth in the indictment.— It haa been
said at the bar, and the law is so, that
whoever endeavours to destroy the mo^
narchy by force makes an attempt to take
away the life of the monarch— and one ob-
seryatioo shall not be concealed from you,
which is, that adhering to the kinff*s enemies
has never been doubtra as an explicit mani*
tfcatatton of an intention to take away his life.
To fliippoit this charge several overt act9
stated to have been committed by the pri-
soner indicative not solely of this treasonable
intention, but also ascertaining the means by
whidi it slMMild be oirrted into execution, are
laid in the indictment.^Tbe same overt acts
arc laid to support the second charge in the

I

indictment, and to this second charge I shall
particularly direct your attention ; — ^you have
beard these acta read from the indictment by
the clerk, and I shall also take notice of
them : — the first is, that during an open and
public war, of which common notoriety is
sufficient evidence, carried on by the ruling
powers of France and the king of these
realm^y the prisoner at the bar is charged first,
that he as a foul traitor against his msjestv
king George the third, &c. — [Here hislordu
ship stated the several overt acts.] — Gentle*
men, as part of this evidence adduced in sup*
port ol tnis indictment is written and part of
It oral, I shall first statathe written evidence*
— >[Uis lordship then read the oath and the
catechism.]

These are two of the pq^ers ; you will see
from your notes whether I state them oor-
rectlv — these are the papers sworn to be the
bond of Defenders in general; I shall offer
some obsaivatioas on these papers, in order
to explain the matter as clearly as I can^
which is all I desire, and which is all my duty
calls on me to do ;«-*vou arc the constitutional
judges, and you alone are to decide upon
them s though a sentleman at the bar stated
he differed fimm tne judges, if the difiereace
related to the situation of his client, I am
not surprised at it, but on that situation I
shall deliver no opinion — ^l have heard it said
that judges make vety bad jurors — to your
consideration, I am happy to say. the cause ia
referred bylaw, the venhct must be yours and
not mine.

Gentlemen, the first position for you to
consider (for that We are at war with France
is obvious), is whether the society deno»
minated Defenders did exist?— -Next, whe-
ther the prisoner was a member of this so-
ciety, and whether he was gmltjr of all or of
any of the overt acta laid in the indictment?

I cannot pass these papers without observe
ing upon them that it is for you to consider,
whetner this engagement is not to submit to
a committee, and to )iay obedience to ita com^
mands in contiadistmction to the laws of tho
land. The association was formed so far
back as the year 1790 , the oath professes to
be an oath of allegiance to the king, qualifie4
with the expression ^ so Ions as I shall con-
tinue under his govemment,'^you are tode^
cide whether the person who swore it,
thought himself bound longer, and how fiur it
is explained by the assertion of Weldon, that
** if tne king^s head were to be taken off to^
morrow, the obligation of this oath would be
at an end.'' — ^You are to consider whether the
'* National Convention,*' means the Couvei^
of France. — ^You are to consider what is in«
tended, when the question is asked ** with
whom are you concerned f '— ^nd the answer
returned, '* the National Convention :"-«
the words to '' auell all nations and de-
throne all kincs /'—You are to decide who*
thcr they maniTest the intentions of the asso*
ciation.

411]

36 GEORGE III.

TriaU qfthe Defendtn^

[412

Another part of the written evidence is the
parchment sworn to have been found in the
possession of the prisoner. — ^This parchment
contains the following form of oath, *' I, A. B.
in the presence of God, do swear of my own
free will and accord."-— {His lordship here
stated the oath verbatim.] — ^You are to deter-
mine whether obedience to the laws means
the laws of the land, and whether courts mar-
tial are such as are recognized by law ? — Part
of this oath throws a light on some of this
mysterious system, and explains, in my mind,
the purpose of the signs used by the Defen-
ders-*for these siens must be understood that
the members of this association may be able
to discover themselves to each other. You,
gentlemen, are to determine what F. and I«
mean, ana what interpretation reason must
deduce from the substance of this parch-
ment.

Havine disposed of these parts of the evi*
dence, which support the cnarge of adhering
lo tlie king's enemies, I will take up the first
witness who aupeared — I will read the evi-
dence, you will not take it explicitly from me,
but you will compare it with your own notes,
and adopt it merely where it is conformable
to them, and consistent with vour own recol-
lection. In stating it I shall meet with the
assistance of my broUters, and if I am incor-
rect, I intreat you to set me rieht.

The first witness is William Lawler, he is a
native of Ireland. &c. — jjHere his lordship read
the testimony oi the witness.]

He next saw the prisoner at Stoneybatter
with a society of Defenders— Hart introduced
a young man in order to swear him a Defen-
der, he explained the principle of the society,
and told him the intention of it was, to assist
the French when they should land. If you
1)e]ieve that the prisoner was at this meeting,
chat their desiens were such as the witness
described, ana that the prisoner swore this
young man according to the forms of the so-
ciety, it supports a suustantial count in the in-
dictment, and you must find him guilty. It
b proved that Hart pulled a book out of his
pocket, that he laid a paper on it, that he ad-
ministered the oath, that he showed the siens
and described the meaning of them. What
these signs are you have seen, the witness
learned the signs before from Weldon, when
he swore him a Defender, and these were the
same signs which Hart made use of on that
occasion. The witness swore — J^His lordship
proceeded to recapitulate the evidence.]

Gentlemen, you have been desired to look
at the pnsoner at the bar, and to consider,
whether firom his youth, he were likely to
commit the crime with which he stands
charged. I also desire you should look at
him ; and as to the circumstance of youth, I
shall read you a case from one of the most
respectable authorities, which elucidates that
maxim of our law, tliat youth shall not be ad-
mitted to excuse tho.<te acts, the commission
of which is attended with a malicious discre-

X

tion. From Judge Foster^s report — a man
who has done honour to himself and the pro-
fession— I shall read you the case of Yorke,
who, at Uie age of 10 years was convicted of
murder.*

[Here his lordship read the case, with the
opinion of the judges, &c.]

The principle I lay down is this, that if you
believe that boy w«s capable of judging of the
conduct, which he is proved to have pursued ;
there is not a single act which is not tarnished
with a malicious— a treasonable discretion.
He knew he was to support the French con-
vention, in case thev should cause this coun-
try to be invaded ; he was intrusted with the
flagitious importance of admitting Defenders,
as a committee-man ; he was suffaciently zea-'
lous in the /cause, to prevail on the members
of his society to bind themselves by oath to
meet in arms on the night which he appoint-
ed. Every act of this kind is not the act of
puerile indiscretion, but bespeaks the compe-
tency of a sensible mind, equal to the treason
with which he is charged. You are to consi-
der also, whether these facts are not stronely
in favour of his innocence, if you believe Uie
testimony you have heard to be the conse-
quence of a wiclied and malevolent'intention
to take away his life. If you shall be of this
opinion, you must acquit him. It b said,
that judges are very bad jurors ; you, gentle-
men, are the judges in these cases, intrusted
and constituted by the laws of the country ; I
love to see the freedom of the country mani-'
fested in the discharge of every trust. It is
the duty of the Court to be counsel for the
prisoner, you arc the judges of the fact, and
you know — I mention it in consequence of an
assertion at the bar— whether or not the pri-
soner has had ftiir play. It is by fiitr and
candid observation, that a client must be de-
fended, and if you should be base enough to
suffer your iudgment to be swayed by the di-
rection of the Court, as jurors I should de-
spise you, as much as I revere the institution.

It is true, that Lawler is an accomplice ; if
he w^ not, he never coidd have discovere4
what he explained of the principles of a so-
ciety bound by oath to secrecy. How can
conspiracy be so totally discovered as by the
evidence of a conspirator ? yet the stability of
his credit remains subject to the observation,
that he was himself an associate in the guilt,
which was discovered by his informaUon. If
the testimony he gave were false and unfound-
edy it might have been easily overthrown.
He states places, houses, names, numbers,
societies, days ; if the prisoner be innocent,
what has prevented his having recourse to the
common oefence of an alibi ¥ why did he Jiot
show, that he was absent from any one of
these meetings, by proving that he was en-
gaged in any specific business, that he wts

* Yorke*s case was cited by lord Clonmell
in his charge to the jury on the preceding trial
of Kennedy. See p. :M}6.

413]

Pairki Hart for High Treason.

A. D. 1796.

[414

Bick, or in the country^ or employed in any
other possible manner? What account is
given of the prisoner ? I am afraid to trust
myself with the evidence, but I trust I have
explained it in the most moderate, and dis-
passionate manner. The witness is not a pre-
tended, or a careless accomplice, he has ap-
pealed to corroborated facts for every circum-
stance of his conduct, and assigned his reasons
on every point of bis informations.

But the case does not rest on the testimony
of Lawler. A Iderman James swore, he found
every circumstance coinciding with the dis-
covery he bad made, not only consistent as
to the past or the present, but confirmed by
what lawler told him was to happen in fu-
ture. He found a meeting in the liberty, the
]mrp08e of which was explained. Healso meets
an association or mob at Crumlin, on the day
on which Lawler informed him it was to be
assembled. Godfrey, on arresting the priso-
ner, found a blunoerbuss and twenty ball
rartrid^ in his bed- chamber. You, gentle-
men, will ask yourselves, what this bo^ had
to do with a blunderbuss and ball cartridges?

A Juror asked, whether the uncle or any
friend of the prisoner was in court ?

Earl of ClonmelL-- 1 do not find that he is,
and if he were, the prisoner's counsel would
have known whether they should produce
him. Where is there any person to give an
account of this transaction ; or even to prove
that the prisoner spent bis time at home, and
went regularly to bed ?■

Here Patrick Hart was called, and the So-
Ucitar General having waived the objection
against producing a witness at this stajge of
the prosecution^ he was sworn. He said, he
believed the prisoner was his nephew, that he
was bis apprentice, was a boy of a good and
loyal disposition, and he did not think him
capable of coipmitting the crime of hijgh trea-
son : the prisoner was never from his house
later than 11 o'clock, the witness himself was
seldom from home.

The Juror observed, he made the inquiry
merely from motives of humanity, because
he was led to think the prisoner was left
friendless and destitute at that hour of the
night.

Henry M^Cormack was then sworn: he
follows the tin business, he knew the priso-
ner and his family, he knew him since he was
apprenticed, he never heard any thine bad of
the prisoner until this charge; his character
has neen remarkably ^ood, if any thing ma-
terial had occurred to its prejudice, he should
have heard of it ; he knew the prisoner these
three years, and was well acquainted with his
father, who lives in the county Meath,
. Earl of ClonmeiL^^My wish to indulge the
humane curiosity of the jury, and the youth
of the prisoner nave induced me to yield to
the production of witnesses at this period of
the trial : — bad the prisoner been a man, 1
should not have done so, as there is nothing
which would establish a mere dangerous pre-

cedent, than the general admission of evidence
to patch up a defence.

There are cases where evidence to charac-
ter is of importance; when a fact is disputed
and where oath is contradicted by oath, a ge-
neral good character should often prove de-
cisive. But in this case, is there a single fact
sworn to by Lawler, which has been contro-
verted ? It is for you to consider the nature
of that system of depravity, which has been
proved ; if you believe there is no such asso-
ciation, that there have been no oaths, that
imputation has been cast where there is no
eround for it, you are not like bigots and zea-
lots, to say to yourselves, we are Protestants,
and we are the persons who have been marked
out for extermination ; you should not give
way to such impressions, but doing justice be-
tween God and your country, you are to judge
whether there was such an association— whe-
ther those papers existed — ^whether with a
traitorous intention the prisoner was a mem<*
her of the society of Defenders. You must
decide in your consciences what is the mean-
ing of this test. This parchment was found
in the possession of the prisoner ; but do not
therefore risk the conviction of a boy on a
hasty conclusion of a treasonable design ; ba-
nish all such ideas from your minds; but as
rational men, do not get rid of your under-
standings. If you beueve the prisoner guilty
of all, or of any of the overt acts laid in the
indictment; ifyou believe that this association
existed, and that the prisoner was one of its
members, and that he acted the part - he is
sworn to have acted, you must find him guilty ;
it is the verdict of your conscience ; it is an
obedience to your oath. Ifyou believe, that
he had this parchment without knowing that
it was in his possession ; ifyou believe mat it
was found upon him and vou can consider it
innocent; if you believe that it will not bear
the meaning which has been affixed to it; if
you believe that from any reasonable consi-
deration, Lawler is not entitled to credit, you
ought to acqui t the prisoner. If this be a case
whereafter all the observations, which have
been made on it, you are still in suspense,
under such a circumstance you ought to ac-
quit him. The benignity of the law imposes
as a duty upon the jury, when the balance is
equal between the guilt and innocence of the
accused, that they should indulge the senti-
ments of mercy. If under all the circum-
stances of this case, your minds remain sus-
pended in doubt, let your verdict be a verdict
of acquittal.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain. — Gentlemen of
the jury; on consideration of the evidence
which has been laid before you, I must con-
fess, that it is with pain I address you.
You have been told, that the prisoner stands
charged with two distinct species of high
treason. You have been informed, that
adhering[to the king's enemies amounts to
compassing his death .i' He is not only
bound from interest, but also is bound by

415]

S6 GEORGE UI.

TriaU ^ihe Defenders-^

[41ff

eath, to support and maiotaia the laws and
constitution of the countiy. You know, as
men possessed of common understanding,
that aahering to the king's enemies, mani-
fests an attempt to dethrone the kin^, and
by construction amounts to an intention to
take away his life. I shall therefore confine
myself to the charseof adhering to the king^s
enemies. 1 shall not attempt to define this
spedes of treason ; but I do not know any act
more explicit^ than that laid in the indict-
ment it is impossible to conceive a plainer
illustration of it, and instead of defining the
offence, I shall point out the fiu:ts, as the best
substitute for a definition. I hope, I do not
differ from the nntlemen concerned for the
prisoner, when I state, that adhering to the
king's enemies is treason, though the intent
should prove abortive. Thus an intercepted
letter is evidence of a treasonable purpose, as
was determined bv the court of King's-bench,
in the case of Jackson, whose treasonable de-
signs were not accomplished. If nodiing
could be considered treason, which did not
Bucceed, no man could be broueht to punish-
ment until the government of this country be
subverted, and it would be then too late tb
call him to an account for offences committed
ajiainst a system which was annihilated by

. his exertions. In this case, taking the evi-
dence to be true, it amounts to plain, obvious,
explicit treason, as ever entered into the head
of num. The charge is adhering to the king's
enemies ; I think tne whole of the evidence
comes to this, that the prisoner associated
with Defenders for the purpose of dethroning
the kine, and aflbrding assistance to the pow-
ers of Amnce. Did not the prisoner become
a Defender for the purpose charged in the in-
dictment ? The first point you are to consider
is, what are the motives of this association ?
You have heard two papers read in evidence,
on the tendency of which you are to decide.
Lawler swears that they were the instruments
exhibited, when he was sworn a DetiMider by
WeMon. You may observe, that one of them
is a general precedent; it binds the person,
who swears to observe it, to be obedient to
all committees, in all lawful matters ; part, of
it professes to be an oath of allegiance to the
crown, and as it has been observed at the bar,
that every subject is bound In allegiance by
the ties of natural justice, this oath, far from
ascertaining that the allegiance of the sulnect

' to the king should continue as long as they
both shall live, abridges the duration of it, by
the words '' so long as I shall live under his
government'^ If there be any thing ambi-
guous in it, you will find the explanation in
the catechism, the question is, " what are
your designs ?" the answer, " to quell all na-
tions and dethrone all kings/' It would he a
iarco to say— and it has not been attempted
to be denied— that a profession of this kind
is an act of adhering to the king's enemies
and assisting the powers of France. It is true
the prisoner was not present when Lawler

was sworn, but it has appeared, that he gave
him the signal similar to that whieh the wit*
ness has Men taudat by Weldon, when he
was made a Defender. This is some evidence
to show you that Hart was privy to the de-
signs of this association, and it is a reasonable
conclusion, that every man entering into a
society is acquainted with its principles. It
is plain from the parchment, that the Defen-
ders were associated with the powers of
France. See what it is, ** and I of my own
free will and consent do swear to be true tothe
present united states of P. and I.'' From the
context it is impossible that this should mean
any thing else than France and Ireland.
Gentlemen, in whose minds are France and
Ireland united ? you know they are at actual
war ; you must see they were united only In
the breasts of traitors; no man without the
consent of the crown can unite them, and if
this be the test of Defenders, they must all be
traitors.

Gentlemen, at a period when the country is
involved in a most distressing war, for what
purpose, can those men unite to take away
arms from those who would defend the king-
dom, in case of an invasion, except fi)r the de-
sign of murder, or of treason ? It is wasting
time to prove the conduct of the prisoner to
be treasonable, and if Defenders collected
arms with the intent of contriving to wage
war against the kins, it is impossible that any
rational man shoulahesitate to say that they
must be traitors.

The question for your consideration is, whe-
ther the prisoner was a Defender, and whether
he became such for the purpose of adhering ro
the king's enemies. Tnis depends in a great
measure on the evidence of Lawler, and you
must be positive that the prisoner was aware
of this intention — ^Lawler is not positive that
Hart was at the meeting in Plunket-slreet —
he was at Stoney- batter, where he brought a
young man and swore him a Defender, de-
claring^ when he administered the oath, that
the principle of the association was, to assist
the French when they should land. At this
meeting it was that be bound the members
by oath to assemble in arms on the succeed-
ing night. In fact he appears perfectly pos-
sessed of their secrets, and acquunted with
their proceedings. The second meeting was
in the libertv where he had a young roan
who he told the witness was a Defender — on
this night he gave powder to the witness
and desired him to make it into ball car*
tridges. At Drury-tane he spoke of the
Defenders intending to rise in order to
massacre the Protestants, so that if you
believe the evidence he was not only con-
scious of the scheme, but entered sincerely
into the project. This will also be material in
obviating the objection of youth, it bespeaks
a craft and treachery beyond his years, and
proves him to be capable of a treasonable dis-
cretion. If you believe Lawler, the prisoner
^was a Defender and conscious of their db-

4173

Patrick Hart/or High Treason.

A. D. 1796.

[418

signs. But the case does not rest here; he
told Godfrey he was sworn a Defender
by force, and had the parchment put into his
possession against his consent ; if a man be
w^laid and trepanned, God forbid his con-
duct should be criminal but if you believe the
evidence, you will find it as certaiD, thai be
'was a party to the cause, and acquainted with
the design.

If he nad proved by evidence that he was
sworn by force, it would be conclusive of his
innocence, but the conduct of a man sworn
by force would be, that he would immediately
dtsdose the circumstance to a magistrate. —
Perhaps it may be imagined that from the
youthof the prisoner, such an idea would not
arise in his mind; but %?ould he not at least
have complained to his uncle of the outrage
which was offered him, and been able to
g^ve evidence of the circumstance on this
trial ? I recollect that his uncle was produced,
and, and no question of the kind was asked
, him. You are to iudge whether the blunder-
buss found in the oed chamber of the prisoner
was in his possession, and if you thinlc so, the
circumstance looks suspicious. These are
the most material considerations for you to
attend to in this part of the case, namely, whe-
ther the prisoner was sworn by force, and you
will also observe how far his conduct is con-
sistent with this idea. — ^If you believe he was
voluntarily sworn a Defender, and that this
parchment was entrusted to his care, it is
persuasive evidence of the truth of Lawler*s
testimony, and the case will not rest on the
oath of an uncorroborated approver. I admit
it may be perilous to convict on the uncon*
firmea testimony of an approver, but Lawler
is not a witness of that description ; it is true,
he was an accomplice who made a voluntary
discovery ; and the history of all conspiracies
informs us. that conspiracy cannot in general
be detected, except by the information of a
conspirator; nor is there any thing un-
natural in the position, that those who betrav
the state, will be ever ready to betray each
other. Whenever, therefore, the evidence of
an accomplice is confirmed by circumstances,
its sufficiency is incontrovertible. Under the
law of £ngland,whichrequiresjtwo witnesses in
cases of hi^h treason (whether the law of Ire-
land differs m this respect from the law offing-
land, is a question on which I shall deliver no
opinion) the evidence of two accomplices is
sufficient to convict, and in my judgment the
evidence of one accomplice,corroboratedby cir-
cumstances affords a more rational ground for
fonviction. . If vou think the prisoner so ex-
tremely youne, tnat he was ignorant of the na-
ture of hid conduct, you ought to acquit him, and
if you shall do so on this principle, I think you
would do well to mention it. If you think
that his havine been forced to become a De-
fender is a ralsehood, the defence itself is
evidence of craft, and you ought to find him
guilty. If any doubt remains in your in ind, i t
IS your duty to acquit hinu

' VOL. XXVI.

I Mr. Baron George.— Gentlemen of the
I jury ; — I shall trouble you with verv few ob-
servations. I shall only remark on the charge
against the prisoner of adhering to the king's
enemies. If you believe he became a Defen-
der with an intent of assisting the king^s ene-
mies, and dethroning the king, or for either of
these purposes, you ought to find him guilty.
As to the species of treason he is sworn to
have committed, I shall observe that the
Defenders wore associated for treasonable
purposes, and that the prisoner became a
member of their society with full knowledge
of their designs — that these designs were
treasonable, you will find from the papers
which were read in evidence — from one of
them you will discover that the Defenders
were associated with the French Convention,
to dethrone all kings — you will find the origin
of this society so far back as January 1790.-^
It appears that they had committees and offi-
cers whom they were sworn to obey. — From
the parchment you will find them bound by
oath to be true to France and Ireland ; — you
will find them bound not to associate with
robbers, and still more not to give evidence in
a court of justice against a member of their
own society. If they were not associated for
robberv, where is the necessity of secrecy? — ^If
it be plain they were not associated in order
to commit robbery, you then will ask your-
selves whether they were not united by treason ?
— All the legal powers of France and Ireland
are at war, and the two countries are united
only in the breasts of traitors. If you are sa-
tished that the society of Defenders is a trea*
sonable association, you are next to consider
whether the prisoner was one of that asso-
ciation. The testimony of Lawler and

Godfrey, corroborated by written evidence,
has been laid before you. There is no doubt
that the evidence of an accomplice ought to
be received with caution: but whenever a
jury is satisfied with the truth of it, it is suffi-
cient to convict: but it ought to be received
with circumspection, as it is oflen admitted
from necessity ; because if no such evidence
could be adduced, the greatest crimes might
be committed with ijnpunity, and no nation
could be secure from treason, which shuns
the light and is fostered in obscurity.

Some reflections have been cast on the
moral character of Lawler — surely no man
who obeys the dictates of religion can be a
traitor, and calling this man inramous is stat-
ing no more than what he himself has ad-
mitted.-^Still there is something particular
with respect to the testimony of this witness
which adds a degree of credibility not ordina-
rily annexed to the testimony of an accom-
Elice. The counsel for the prisoner have
een instructed in every circumstance of what
he has proved, because the evidence of this
man given on a former trial, almost similar
to the present, has been published, and yet no
man can be found to controvert what he has
sworn. His testimony was disclosed montlis
2 E

419] S6 GEORGE ItL

Trials of ike Defendgrs^^

[420

before the prisoner was put on his trial, and
yet it remains uncontradicted. Consider whe-
ther it is within the compass of higenuity to
fabricate snch a s^'stem, and to 8u|xport it
with consistency ! — this should be a circum-
stance for your consideration if his evidence
Mood alone on its own credibility uncorrobo-
rated by ciraimstanceSy.but it is confirmed
t>y subsequent facts corresponding with his in-
formation. When Godfrey went to arrest the
prisoner, he received directions to search him,
and m his pocket he found the parchment
which has been read. You will consider
whether he became possessed of it in conse-
ifuenee of the accident which he stated —you
must consider how far it is probable,* that a
man never from home at a later hour than
eleven o'clock, should be seized bv force and
sworn in the manner he described, and have
this muntTftent of treason entrusted to his dis-
cretion.— An honest man might. be involunta-
Tily sworn, but the obligation of such an
oath is liueatory and vain, and it would be
not only the duty, but the inclination of any
honest man to withdraw himself from such
an association, and to manifest by his future
conduct, an abhorrence of its principles. It
appears suspicious that in the bed-chamber of
the prisoner were found implements with
which that oath was to be carried into execu-
tion. This circumstance gives an additional
weight and probability to the evidence which
it would not otherwise possess. — ^You are to
receive the testimony otLawler with caution,
but you are not at liberty to reject it. You are
bound by etery duty, human and divine to
investigate the truth. You are to consider
the truth and the justice of the case— Other
considerations are* in other hands.— You have
a sacred trust to discharge to the public
—If no doubt remains in your minds, you
must find the prisoner guilty — if you have
any, you ought to acquit him.

The jury retired at half past one o'clock on
Thursd^ morning, and in about ten minutes,
returned with a verdict finding the prisoner

— GUILTT.

prisoner had early manifested a disposition to
repentance ; but mow and again his wavering
mind fell back, and did not adopt any settled
determination. — Myloids,! shall not proceed
tipon this trial, and therefore move your lord-
ships that the prisoner be remanded.

The prisoner was accordingly remanded,
and directions were given the sneriff, that he
might be without irons, if he could be safeiy
kept.

Upon a subseonent day the prisoner was
brought up and nis counsel moved, that bis
trial be postponed until the next commis-
sion.

Mr. Attorney General, — }lfy lords, I con-
sent to this motion, and that the object of it
may not be misunderstood, I mean to have a
pardon made out for the prisoner, so that he
may plead it at the next commission.

Fridatfy Februaryy 26/A.

Edward Brady was put to the bar for the
purpose of being tried upon the indictment
for high treason fouhd against him (Vid. anti,
p. 359)-— After the panel was called over, it
was intimated to the attorney general that the

? prisoner was disposed to acknowledge his of-
ence, and throw himself upon the mercy of
the Crown.

Mr. Attorney General, — My lords, I under-
stand that the prisoner looks to the crown for
mercy. — Sure I am that nothing can fill the
royal breast with more true delight than to
extend mercy where any thine like repentance
appears; and the officers wno prosecute fbr
the crown will feel much pleasure in assisting
its benignity under such circumstances.— The

Saturday February 27th.

The grand juries of the city and county of
Dublin were called over.

Thomas Kennedy and Patrick Hart were
put to the bar.— Their indictments were read,
and they were severally asked, why judg-
ment oi death and execution should not
be awarded agunst theng according to law.

Thomas Kennedy, — I hope from tlie recom-
mendation of the jury that you will have
compassion upon me, and I hope for a lon^
day. — A man who was not recommended had
twelve weeks.

Patrick Hart, — ^You have been so mer-
ciful to Brady, who is ch«irgecl with the same
offence, that 1 hope for mercy.

Earl of Cftmwc//.— You, Thomas Kennedy,
and you Patrick Hart, and each of you stand
convicted upon indictments fbr high treason
under the statute S5 Ed. Srd, in eompassitfg
and imagining the death of our most gracious
sovereign lord the king, and also adhering
to the Icing's enemies. A plain overt act of
the intention of levying war, or bringing wafr
upon the kingdom, or inducing the enemies
to invade it, is settled to be an overt act of
compassing the king's death. Acts such as I
shall mention, whicn appeared from the evi-
dence to have been committed by you, never
have been doubted to be overt acts of trea«
son; — nor is it necessary, that you should
have carried your schemes into execution ^
becatlse that would have defeated the jus-
tice by which you have been brought tb
trial. You have each been found guilty by
separate juries of the most respectable
citizens in this metropolis. You have, eac
of you, taken all the advantage that
the peculiar beneficence of our law has
granted to persons in your situatron, and yoii
have challenged such persons, as either fhnn
secret knowledge, or personal dislike, or any
other motive, you otgected to. You have had
counsel assigned to you of your own choosing,

t

«fl]

Ptttrjei Hwrtfir H^k Tmuotu

A. D. 1796.

C«ia

«pd you have had a long time to prefiare for
your defence. You have bad the assistance
of your counsel in llxe amplest way. You
have been prosecuted, as your own counsel
have admitted, with moderation— with mode-
ration, decency^ and temper. — ^You have been
tried I hope, with calmness — with patience —
vrith humanity and justice by the Court; —
with every advantage to each of you, which
the law aud constitution of the country allow,
and every indulgence which the Court could
extend, or which you desired, during the
course of a long examination, which was
observed upon with the utmost latitude by
counsel.

Tlie evidence upon which you have been
found guilt;^ leii not the least doubt in the
breasts of either of these j uries. If there had
been a doubt in either, they were expressly
charged, in case of such doubt, to acquit ; and
the recommendation they gave snows the
humane temper of their minds;— for they
have annexea their reason that it was not on
account of any doubt of the guilt, but of your
youth.

You have been found guilty, each of you,
of uniting yourselves with treasonable as-
s(M:iations in thb country ; — the objects
of which are avowed, open, and plain, to
persons of the most inferior understanding —
of one infinitely less than you have disclosed
in the few words you have uttered. Upon
each of you was found written evidence
which cannot be doubted<-'-written evi-
dence that proves your guilt, and speaks for
itself.— It professes to be a voluntarv oath
taken to support — not the law of ihe land —
but the National Convention of France, for so
the jury have found it. The object of it was
to destroy not only his majesty, but all kings
— to be true only to your own association.
These two papeis, the oath and the catechism,
carry u|)on the face of them intrinsic evidence
of your guilt, and show clearly what your ob«
j|ect was,— that it was to support a French in«
vasion, if the French should mvade this coun-
try. It was proved to the clearest conviction
of the Court (not one of whom ever mentioned
an opinion before while it was possible it
might do you harm with the jury that you
were first members of the Telegraphic so-
ciety) you then passed under another denomi-
nation, grounded on the affectation of philo-
sophy, Uie Philanthropic society ; then you
became Defenders, and you disclosed their
object. It is manifest that you knew by what
ceremonies they were instituted — you knew
they must continue, if at all, by robbery — by
house-breaking — by plunder — by treachery —
by murder anoby treason. All these wicked,
and flagitious offences are comprehended
Mnder the name Defender, as b manifested by
what is proved upon you. Your system was
to ^ out with such arms as you could get,
pr nad got by robbery or other means,
to plunder houses iu tlie dead of the night
~~a during the innocent sleep of them-

habit^nts. You bound people by oaths to
bring their arms, for the purpose of procuring
more. It has been proved, that you made
subscriptions to buy gunpowder for the same
purpose, aud when you had collected arms in
this manner, it was proved, that you intended
to assist the French, now at open war •• that
you intended to assist them in the invasion of
this country, when they should attack it ; and
it was prov^ upon you, that the purpose, of
the association^ wicked, and flagitious, and
rebellious as it is, formed in the very bowels
of this country, was to have made a general
rising — to have massacred the Protestants of
this country — to have taken the com and pro«
visions — to have taken the forts— plundered
the banks — seized the arsenal — and made an
attack upon every fortress in the kingdom, to
assist the French in the invasion of Uiis your
native country, apd you were to become the
masters of Uie isknd.— It was proved upon
you in the clearest way and in the most con-
sistent, I ever heard. You were assembled,
not accidentally in this place, or the other.-^
It vas proved, that you were in Cork-street — .
that you were at the assembly in Drury-lane
— that you were at Stoneybatter— that you
were in Barrack- street — at rlunket-street--4t
Crumlin. In all these several places described
with accuracy, and pointed out with such
clearness, that there was scarce a tittle stated
by Lawler, which might not be contradicted
if not founded in fact, and which is not forti-
fied by such circumstances as scepticism can-
not disbelieve, nor rational men deny their
assent to. — ^Twenty- three are stated to have
been at one meeting, — more at another. It
was sworn, that one of vou declared there were
4,000 Defenders in Dublin, and the use which
was to have been made of them justifies the
assertion. If you could collect them, tha
system was artful, and practicable, and too
likely to succeed. Numbers of your age were
selected, I take for granted,— and even that
appeared, — bv persons elder than yourself —
you weremaae Committee-men to give you
a consequence in your own minds ; you were
empowered to swear new Defenders, to give
you a degree of active importance. You, and
each of you were active persons in that part
which was most fitted for you— you could
read, and write, and you were under the conr
duct of Burke, a man notoriously of infamous
character, who had circulated his doctrines to
his owndissrace but not yet destruction, pub-
lishing with his name atheistical treatises to
justify his conduct. And this was the artful
expedient made use of, by instructing you not
to believe the power of the Almighty, or the
doctnne of rewards and punishments, te make
you as wicked as human creatures are capable
of being, and then alleging, that you are not
to be bdieved if one of the party should give
information against the others. The system
was conformable to tbe French philosophy--*
*^ I will debauch their principles, and their
mindsi and if any man be weak enough, or in

4?S] 36 G-EORGE III.

the general sense of mankind honest enough
to betray us, we will show, he is not to be be-
lieved upon his joath, having denied the exist-
ence of a God, which we had taught him to
do/^ and thus you would protect one piece of
wickedness by another.

Again, see another dangerous part of the
system. They resorted to the youngest per-
sons they could find, active and fit lor their
purpose. « We will put them," said the
advisers, "into the departments, that will
gratify their voung pride, and the unthinking
youth shall be roaae Committee- men — they
shall consider themselves officers, and if they
be detected, their tender years will melt the
hearts of the jury, who will sacrifice justice
to the known humanity of the country."

Here then was the second part of the artful
and wicked advice by which this system of
treachery was carried on. Burke was to be
one of ten— it was proved, that each of the ten
was to levy ten, and each of the last ten was
to levy five more — thus to make a body of
COO; — each man was in some degree in
point of justice and good faith responsible for
the persons levied by himself. It was sworn
to tne satisfaction of the Court and jury, that
the design was by dressing these men to the
amount of 100 in scarlet uniforms to persuade
the citizens into a belief, that the army was
with the insurgents, and by this imposition
and craft to plunder the Bank, and secure the
arsenal.— Was that absurd?— No such thing.
What did you want to effect it ?— Nothing but
ammunition and arms. It was sworn, that
you tried other means, that of robbing the
houses of individuals ; and as the strongest
proof against you, upon you, Kennedy, were
found the oath and the catechism ; and upon
yon Hart, when surprised early in the morn-
ing, was found a parchment writing, begin-
ing " I, A. B. do swear to be tme to France
and Ireland," — for so the jury have inter-
preted it,— and then it proceeds in the same
traitorous language as those found in the pos-
session of you, Kennedy. A blunderbuss
and SO ball cartridges were also found.

But it is said, why, this is impossible, to
make a rebellion of boys. See what the an-
swer plainly is. It is admitted, that there
has been a conspiracy — that it has consisted
of great numbers, and yet hitherto few or none
have been secured, through the influence of
these illegal and detestable oaths administered
by bojrs. Does it not then bring this unhappy
reflexion, painful to every mind, that it is a
cojispiracy from which we cannot preserve
the youth of the kingdom : — It has gone so
far as to conupt our apprentices ; and it is not
povertjr, distress, or oppression, which has
given rise to it. There is not a man, sworn
against as forming this conspiracy, who does
not appear to have had a trade, and means of
living — a trade and means of living depending
upon the elegancies of elevated life, and not
by the necessities of society. One appeared
to be a carver, another a gilder, another a

Triah of the Defenders'^

[424

glass-cutter, &c. There have been others of
more adult years, connected with societies,
not a great wa^ removed from guilt in their
breasts and minds, though not indicted for
what you have been tried and found guilty.
This is not a subject taken up on a sudden;
you have had the same able and le^l assist-
ance, as to one of your counsel, whom you
named four months ago. There was not a
word of Lawler's evidence which was not
known for some months; — it has even become
the subject of publication. Yet not one word
of it has been contradicted to this hour by any
man— by friend or parent. It appears you
are not abandoned children, or forlorn, with-
out some persons to look afler you, Your
guilt has not depended upon the mere asser-
tion of one man. On the contrary his evidence
stands supported by circumstances and facts,
that cannot mislead any mind in the progress
of truth. It appears that Lawler said, ** go
take Kennedy ; you will find the Defender's
oath and catechism in his pocket."— He had
seen it frequently before, and thought it pro-
bable it might be found, where he saw it de-
posited ; and there is no attenipt to show any
sort of compulsion, or contrivance by which
those papers were put in by Lawler, or any
person for him. When you, Kennedy, were
arrested, these papers were found upon you ;
so that not only what Lawler said as to the
past tense but also the present is fortified by
different facts. And when you. Hart, were
arrested, this parchment was found in your
possession ; not indeed from any information
given by lawler; it does not appear, that he
knew of it ; but it is evidence to establish
one of the facts charged against you as a De-
fender, which the jury have found you to be.

I shall speak a word of your age. From
the necessity of supporting human society,.
and of preventing fiagttious crimes from being
unpunished when perpetrated by youth, courts
have resorted to prmted cases, where judges
have determined, that younser persons than
you, perpetrating crimes ought to be punished.
In the case of murder, a person of the a^of
ten years, was sentenced to capital punish-
ment, and the reasoning of that case wiU go
down to the lowest age, where a malicious,
mischievous intention appears. And in truth
it would be absurd, if it were otherwise. — It
would be to say, that certain classes of people
in society are able to commit the worst of-
fences, and yet the law cannot reach them.
By your industry and activity, if the evidence
be true — as the jury have sworn they thought
It, and we have no reason to doubt it— -it is
now to be taken for granted, that you
thoroughly understood every part of the
wicked treason you were embarked in. I men-
tion this to show, that there is no part of so-
ciety that is not the object of legal punxsli-
ment, even to the forfeiture of life.

This being a short view of the facts, recapi-
tulated in the manner usually stated by per-
sons in my situation, I must now put you io

425]

PaHck Hartjor High Treason*

A. D.

1796.

C426

mind of the horrid oflfence and wicked aess of
which you have been giiilty. I suppose tliere
is no r&tional creature, that has heard what I
have stated, who will not go away convinced,
that the evidence is plain, clear, and coercive.
There has not been a sinele fact contradicted,
or explained in your favour, and that the
matter of these papers found in your posses-
sion is most flagitious and detestable, cannot
be denied.

The salvation of this kingdom has, under
the Providence uf God, been secured by the
information given by one of yourselves, by
which your oloody, and treasonable designs
have been defeated, and prevented. For if
you had succeeded in your abominable pro-
jects against this kingdom, instead of its hav-
ing been, in the time of a ruinous and cala-
iDitous war to every other part of the earth
the most fortunate spot on the globe until
1790, it would have been the miserable scene
ef carnage, like France, the place from whence
■you expected friends and assistance.

The punishment of our benign law not being
for vengeance, but to deter others by example,
has led me to expatiate upon the evidence,
and the nature of your crime, your situation,
and circumstances, and the danger to which
the kingdom was exposed if the design had
Dot been providentially revealed by the infor-
mation ol the prosecutor, more at large than
perhaps I would have in another case. But
It is right, that in the publication of this trial,
the eye of the public should be open to a foil
view of their own situation. Persons who
have been involved in these conspiracies
should guard themselves against the mischiefs
of high treason, by being publicly apprized of
the punishment attending upon it.

You have in another instance wounded the
peace of society extremely. You have in the
progress of your wretched and treasonable
pursuits thrown a cloud of suspicion oyer your
connexions and voiir associates, which can
never be dispelled but by their most explicit
good conduct ; for if any person formed the
most distant conjecture of your views, every
such person has been guilty of a gross mis-
prision, by not disclosmg them, so that they
might be best guarded against, defeated* or
prevented.

It is a painful part of my duty which vet
remains, and that is to pronounce the dreadful
judgment of the law upon you, which has been
considered by the Court.

[His lordship then passed sentence upon the
prisoners, in the manner usual m such
cases, after which the prisoners were re-
manded.]

A Act the prisoners were removed, his lordship
addressed the grand juries.

Earl of ClonmeU, — Gentlemen of both
Grand Juries;— In addressing you, I mean
«nly to give you that preference, which the
law has given you, by thinking you the first

auditors of what has passed. What I said,
and mean to say, if I did not think the occa-
sion called upon me to speak to you, and
through you to the people no^ assembled, I
might well be excused from this troubl^. It
is a painftil task. I hope in God, it may be
attended with the consequence I expect. I
thought it might involve considerations of too

freat extent to comprehend it in the lessons*
was obliged to give the prisoners. I there-
fore restrained myself, meaning to address
you. Many are here collected, of different
ages and various degrees ; some entrusted with
the highest places which the constitution
knows. I thought if any thing could be done
by calling the attention of such an auditory,
by calling them to a sense of their situation,
this would be the most useful hour of my life.
This subject of which you have heard so
much, is a prosecution, conducted by the ser-
vants of the state in tlie manner which you
have observed, and involved in tlie length of
time you have perceived. My objects are
two-fold. First, to show what I think (and
it is a satisfaction to find that my ideas cor-«
respond with thoM of my brethren) of the
probability of the charge made by ikwler-^
and next, if I can, to exhort you to a manly
exercise of your duty as magistrates and
subjects.

Gentlemen, as far back as the year 1790^
and several years preceding, I suppose there
was not a country upon earth, that felt itself
in so fortunate a progress of prosperity and
advancement as Ireland. At that period com-
menced— and rt is so stated by written evi-
dence—the institution of Defenders,* though
perhaps under another name, for the oath
states their institution in 1790, with improve-
ments since. The country has been since in-
volved in three of those calamities, that each
of you, who do your duty to God, pray to be
delivered from, namely, from •* sedition,
privy conspiracy, and rebellion." I amspeak-
we of facts of notoriety. It began with se-
dition: and the simple and inspired line
which I have quoted, with a knowledge of
the human heart, makes the other two fol-
low, viz. privy conspiracy and rebellion. It
is from these, I hope, God will deliver you.
At that time, a fugitive traitor, Hamilton
Rowan,t who had tor sedition been impri-
soned, and was connected with that self* exe-
cuted traitor, Jackson,t and some other fugi-
tive felons, whose names it is not necessarv
to mention, had begun to vitiate and debauch
the minds of the country, and from that time
to this it has never rested — French names
and proceedings were adopted — treason was
the object— murder the means. In 1791,

* The origin and progress of this association
may be traced by referring to «, Plowden's
Historical View ot the State of Ireland, pp.
i^OO, 975, 385, 436, 460, 531, 544, 569.

t See his trial, anii, Vol. 92, p. 1033.

X Sec his trial, antt, Vol. 25, p. 783.

427]

S6 GEORGE III.

Triab tfihe Definukr4'^

[4S9

William Lawier, who has since appeared as a

Erosecutor, having learned a trade, by whicb
e appears to have goit a reasonable and com-
fortable subsistence, left tliis country, and
vent to England, where his father had been
— he enlifited as a soldier, and having deserted
from that situation, changed his name. I
will show you that love of life, the dearest
object of human creatures, has been the on-

final director of this man^s conduct— that he
iscovered to save his life, and not before he
thought his life was in danger, and that not
from the law, but his own associates.

Ue went to London, and there under the
same of Wright, he got into one of their trea*
90iuible CorrespondineSoeieties. I speak from
his own description of it. I am not a judge
of that country, nor am I to try any of them.
But his description was, that they were to
force a reform ny arms brought to the throne.
Ue was asked, if he had room to conceal 100
arms, for that it was as necessary for them to
learn the use of arms as well as the society of
Sheffield, who had it inoonteipplation to force
a radical reform.

Now, take up the first part Is it impro*
bable, that men in the armjr should be ro-
sortea to ?— 'the tlui^ speaks itself. Is it im-
probable, that Sk man who deserted, should
change his name to prevent his being detect*
«d ^-^tfae thing speu^s itself. While in Lon-
don, ha is directed to a man of notorioiia
name, Daniel I^aac Eaton,* who recommends
him to Rowan, at that time not thrown into
gaol. Lawier got a letter under the name ^
Wright to Rowan* to whom he told his real
name, and the very masque was a sort of re-
commendation to such a man as Rowan. I
epeak without reserve of a map, who has
quitted the kingdom, end stands outlawed and
attainted of treason. Was it li)i^ely he should
object on account of the fiction of name } He
makes Lawier a ]>resenl — of what.^-r^ ^
print of Thomas Paine, the saint of rebellicMiy
anarchy, and murder ! Proud of his present,
be follows Rowan into the g^l Qf Newgate s
-*-ihere Rowan discourses with him iipon the
propriety of havipg corresponding societies
here, similar to that in London. Is there a
tittle of that improbable ?—or at which the
mind revolts? — that a person, coming into
this country should endeavour to circulate
those opinions and principles he adopted
there. '* Get sis staunch men,'' says Rowan,
*^ whom you can depend upon. I would r^
iher have them than 600 others— see what
has happened to me-*I have been discovered
bv those ^ho were not staunch/' If this was
idle talk, founded in ioui^nation and wicked
lies, it misht be contradicted by those wJu>
then attended Newgate. Lawier next becomes
a member of a society, called the Telegraph,
which opens, by degreet, more krgely into

^^■

T T-

* See his trials in this Collection, VoL 9S,
' pp. 763,786^; Vol. 83 p. lOl^iM A. D, 1619

the Philanthropic. These were beaded by
wtiom? — Bv Hurke-*-a man, notoriously of
infamous character, expelled from the uui*
versity (or abominable blasphemy and i«i«
piety. Where is Burke? Why not cootm-
diet what Lawier said ? No person pretends
to say, he is not in existence. But it may be
said, he is afraid. Why is he a&aid? — he
ouEht not to be afraid, if be be an honest man.
If he be an honest man, why not contradict
this account ?— «but it does not depend upon
Burke alone. Lawier states a number of per-
sons by name. Ue was himself a zealous
Defender-^his religion, Protestant, and he
frequently attended the methodists. Ue.w^s
apparently an enthusiast to his purposes*— go*
ing as far as the Defenders did— -and for what ?
— in order to est^Iish a republic. He was
emplojred to levy forces, he did levy them.
He levied his ten men. Was this improba-
ble ? He had been ^ soldier — he enlisted his
ten men, according to his promise to Burke.
Is there any thing in that at which the mind
revolts? What is next to be done? — they
collect together, not in one place only, or se-
cretly, but in several. He attends; he de-
scribes the places most accurately. Twenty-
three met in one place ; he mentions most of
their names, Cook, Pry, Coffey, Galland, At-*
kinson, &c. These were my associates. Weris
they ? — ^They are fugitives m guilt, and con-
scious traitor^**why do not some of them
come, and contradict what this man has
sworn ? What is next done ? — after he stated
who Wi^re at pry's, he mentioned several
other places, and particulariy Plunket-street
where Defenders met, and where subscrip*
tiops were made for buying gunpowder ; — ^tbe
waiter was a Defender, ai^ therefore tooJf
€a]*e, not t9 let sjapangers in. Is there any
man to contradict tliis? Honest men need
not be afraid to idlege the contrary, if the
fiicts were not so— any of the fiimily could
prove it, if it were iaise. The prisoner migbl
say (if the faot were po), '' I was iq bed, and
will show it—we were not at Dry*s, or we
were only throe in number.'^ The witness
mentioned levera) housekeepers — is it not a
chidlenge to the whole city of Dublin to give
evidence agMnst these assertions ?— '* Let me
see, if there be any man to contradict me.**
What does he say nextf-*-be uses language
that must bring certainty to every mina— ** (
liked the prisoner ^s a Defender.'' There is
no evidence to show he h^d any auarrel with
these people. He was himself a faithful De-
fender, as they thought. One of them told
him, it he was asked what religion he was of,
not to say he was a Protestant ; accordingly
he sud he was a Roman CathoUe. Upon that
confidence, Hart calls him intp a window,
when they were assembled at Drury-lane,ana
/ays, ** you know that Coiiey, the chairman,
what rmiaion is he?" ** Why do you ask me ?**
aud Lavrler.—^' Because," replied the other*
** if I thou(;ht bf w^ a Protestant, I wouW
not k^pium cgi9]W}r, iwdl UU ypu, U»l

Patrick Hart/or High Treason.

A. D. 1796-

[430

the inteDtkm wis to make a general mlnj^ on
scKh a nighty but we coDM<lered, that it we
did it, betore the harvest was ^tin, we might
be starved, but as soon as that is done, we will
make the attack.'' Then indeed, it behoved
Lawler, who had changed his name to save
his life, to take care of himself—'' they will
find out» that I am a Protestant, and it is ne-
I should save my life." Is there any

thins improbable in that? Let me be under-
stood to say, that they were to be destroyed
by Defenders and nifnans, traitors and rel)«ls.
Does this cast reflections upon the good sub-
jects of the kingdom ? No such thing ;--God
fbrbkl !--I wish to make every man zealous,
bound in point of honoor as well as conscience
to support the cause of justice and of his
country against ruffians, against plunder, vio^
lence, murder, and treason ; and if you adopt
the means which I shall suggest, I will show,
that in a month, if you do your duty, there
will be an end of Defenders and of treason.
It IB a bold promise. It is a promise founded
oo'my conviction of the integrity and spirit of
Irishmen and all classes of them. Let me
proceed, however, with the conduct of these
men. With respect to Kennedy, the Defen-
der's creed is found in his pocket; it was
found, where the witness had previously said
it was. Why, to talk of his not deserving
credit aficr that, would be to suppose men
were made up of idiocy, and phrenzy . If you
find your watch in a man's pocket, would yoti
disbelieve the man, who had previously told
you it was there. To doubt then the evidence
as to Kennedy would be to make you the
most stupid animals, without sense or motion.
Then what is found upon Hart?-^not indeed
what Lawler knew to be there; but there is
found in Hart's pocket, at his uncle's house,
in a room up stairs, this notable magnaoharta
of Defendensm and treason, in more strong
expressions than either the oath or catechism.
It speaks as treasonably, as rebellion or trea-
son could make it. France and Ireland are
called united states ! — It was well observed by
one of my brothers upon the trial, " how
united but in treason ?" — ^You may as well
unite fire and water. The two nations are at
war, and can only be united in a bond of
wickedness and blasphemy, rebellion and
treason. So that finding this paper upon Hart
would alone show, that every word said re-
specting him was true. But does it rest
there? No : for in the chamber of these in-
fants, as they are called, dressed out so for
the occasion, there are found a blunderbuss
and fiO ball cartridges !— Then it is said will
you pass sentence on infants ?-^I have known
juries long: I have never known above three
instances where they were mistaken. How
are these juries taken?— from the body of the
city. Was it a parcel of grandees ?— no such
thing, ^ach dt these boys, by industry and
diligence might in the course of a few years,
be as great and as grand as any of those who
tried him. What Uien was found P— a blun-

derbuss and 20 ball cattrid^ ! Is this the
innocent skinner's apprentice, with a blun*
derbuss and SO ball cartridges in his box!—
Gentlemen, parents do not do their duty-^
magistrates do their doty ill — masters still
worse — Neither their duty to God, their con-
sciencies, or the public. Did they but see,
where their apprentices, and those employed
aftout them consumed their time, and what
company poor lads, taken from their parents, '
and left with those who should teach them
religion as well as trade, frequented, the mis-
chief mi^htbe prevented. Can it be imagin-
ed, that if masters did their duty, such a sys-
tem as now prevails, could continue for a week ?
—-No. But what do the masters come here
to say ? — not to contradict the witness, but to
say, they do not believe him. One man was
a member of a reading society. A master
tailor, 36 years of age, and a father of a fiimily^
reading Pope's works and a Dictionary of
Sciences 1 '< I attended a reading society— it
became the Philanthropic Society, and Paine*s
Age of Reason was the object of our studies.''
Is this the way in which the honest and well
deserving tradesmen and artificers of the city of
Dublin should be employed? If masters
were employed as they ought, would appren^*
tices be employed as they ought not? An-
other witness produced on behalf of the prison
ner was a man of the name of Robinson, and
very unfortunately, I find an indictment
against him. I do not presume him guilty;
—but he is indicted — for what?— for publish*
ing caricatures — an odious mode of obtaining
a livelihood. Who is the next witness pro*-
duced ?— the landlord, who found him honest,
industrious, and diligent, but said he did not
deserve credit, because he used to work upon
Sunday, and did not go to church. Who is
the next person brought to impeach Lawler ?
— Gallana, who became a grocer from an
hair-dresser, and who Lawler proves had giVen
him a pistol, knowing what use was to be
made of it. Tlie pistol was brought inta
court. My God ; then is it necessary io gn
into a deep and laboured refinement to satisfy
you, that every thing which has been said
hitherto is deserving of credit ?

It is said, and it was argued upon ingeni-
uusly, that a man having no sense of religion,
who thought of putting the king to death,
who deserted, who was charged with petty
thefts and was faithless to his own people, are
youtobelievohim? — ^The answer is plain —
you find that the man entered into a wicked
association, and when it came to touch his
own lite, he quits it. Under what circum-
stances ? — ^Not as an approver. He was not
sworn against. Not a man of the whole
{(ang was sworn against. He came and gave
information to him in whom he thought he
could confide. He then ^oes to alderman
James, tells him of the situation of afiairs.
An assembly was to be had ; and their object
was communicated. The magistrate meets
3,000 pepple. In answer to a question^put by

431]

36 GEO AGE III.

TrUds of the Difendeti^

[4SS

the prisoner's. counsel he says, he helieres
their object was, (to attack the Bank, plunder
it, and take the arsenal of the Castle. Is that
a reason why Lawler is to be disbelieved,
because he is confirme€l by a magistrate of
the city of Dublin as to part of the informa*
tion he has given ^

Again, as to Crumlin : a meeting of De-
fenders is held there— that will be the time,
says Lawler, to rescue me— and that is the
time, he first openly abandons the association.
If he were a liar, is there any thing more cer- I
tain than that he could not muster 3,000 peo-
ple? What then prevents you from yielding
to every rule of probability confirmed by tes-
timony that cannot err? — For so it is with
respect to what has been deposed by
Carleton and Godfrey ; all confirming every

tittle and every circumstance passing from
this man's lips.

See it, in another light. It is said he con-
cealed part of what he should have dis-
covered, namely, the abominable design

against the chancellor. He did so. But it

appears there was such a design. To be sure,

a man who was not shocked at the idea' of

destroving the king, would tiot be shocked at

tiie scheme of destroving the chancelior-^but

he was shocked at his own danger, — and is

this improbable, that they designed mischief

azainst that great magistrate, whom they

aiterwards attacked, and were near destroying

in the open streets? Therefore you see that

probability follows this witness, as a shadow

does the substance, fully establishing the

truth of his narration.
Now, as to another part of the case. One

of these Defenders was tried three months

ago. The evidence was very nearly in terms the

same, with regal d to the Defenders, as has

appeared against these two boys. Three
juciges attended upon that occasion ; — men,

whose characters, if some of them were not

present, I would minutely describe, men of

temper, of high reputation even before they

|{pt upon the bench — they try and ap-
prove of a verdict aeainst Weldon. One jury

acquitted Leary. — WhyP Because the only

time he went among them, he was drunk.

In such a state, any man might have done
ihe same. But then a clamour is made
.through the country, <' are the lives of sub-
jects to be taken away upon the oaths of
atheists ? — A fly*s wing ought not to be hurt I of mercy is where it ought to be untouched
by his testimony." — Seo what was done: the I by me. It will be exercised or not, for any
judges postponed the execution of the man, ' thing I know ; — I form no conjecture
to let in time as much as possible to see whe-

coses, honour should not be spoken (^, But
it so happened, that some of the jury who ac-

Suitted r^ary, were upon the jury who found
Kennedy suiity. So thai with every prcju*
dice which they might have derived from
Leary's case upon their minds, after a trial
which took up thirteen, or fourteen hours,
they came back in ten minutes satisfied that
Kennedy was guilty.

Again, I had the good fortune to be assist*
ed by two of the judges, who presided in the
former cases : they brought their notes into
court with them, and, as was their duty, com-
pared those notes with what appeared upon
the latter trials, in order to discover whether
there was any inconsistency. It is the
fashion now to publish every thing. Tht
former trials were published ; every thing
met the public eye, and still every thing is
confirmed : — what was sworn to before, was
sworn to again, and no part is contra*
dieted.

I shall take leave of this part, convinced ia
my mind, and satisfied in my conscience, thai
the information of the witness, upon every
part material to the trials, was founded in
truth. I shall end this part with this ob-ser-
vation. — It was sworn, that th^ intended to
have put to deatli the jury who iound Jackson
guilty. It was not improbable, that they who
designed to murder the king and the chan-
cellor, would have murdered a Jury. When
the last jury heard what the witness said, it
required manliness to find a verdict of con-
viction after such a menace ; they were con-
vinced by facts, and thcv scorned to entertain
any fear. Thej^ heard what might have
alarmed weak minds, little, weak, traitorous,
minds. A juror might have said, *< I will not
put myself into that situation," — on the con-
trary, they came in manfully, in ten minutes^
findmg a verdict of guilty upon their oaths
and their consciences.

But aher that, each jury did recommend
the prisoners, as objects of mercy, and
assigned their single reason, tiiat it was oa
account of their youth. I then said, what I
now repeat, that I would communicate that
recommendation to government. I lost no
time in it ; I stated it in the very words of the
jury, without adding a word of mine upon the
evidence, being of opinion, that I should not
serve the prisoner if I did. Tl

'he consideration

ther subsequent events ^ould produce any
different evidence. Time is given, assistance
is had, and every opportunity upon earth is
allowed to bring lignt upon the subject, and
discover whether the witness were a liar.
What is the result? — a confirmation of every
tittle. But there is another circumstance : —
two or three of the jury in the latter cases
were upon the jury who acauitted Leary : it
was to their honour ; thougn perhaps in such

upon It.

I now take leave of this map, and the ge-
neral opinion circulated about him, that he »s
not to ne believed upon his oath. If there be
any man in court of a different opinion, he is
of different materials in heart and understand-
ing from any I know of.

Is it of consequence, or not, that these
trials should go luto the country, truly ? I
think it is. It was alleged, that the verdicts
were founded upon tlie c](trava^nt assertioua

iSS]

Pairtek HMlJor fHgk Treason.

A. B. 1796.

C4S4

•fa wretch iviioebotlid not be belieired. If
there be any man who thinks that way, I de»
sire no lon^r to discourse with him upon any
safest

Having- in«^ thoee imfirestioDB (tipOD your
aiifids^ 'Which I trust I have, with regafd to
the credibility of this witness, let me inekitt0n
what is of loore consequence to us all, md if
you treat«ii with negte;t, yon do not deserve
what the constitntioa and your oaths suppose
^ou to possess, nay, the heads you wear. We
iMive been labouring five years under the evils
«f sedition, coupled with privy.conspimcy,and
rebellion. One springs from the other, but
fortunately as tbe^^ grow up, they crumble by
the Weight of their own enormity, and ieouid
not exist init from one cause, and that iSy tiie
criminal totpor, which prevails among you. I
have observed a criminal disregard, fmlolenee
and inattention of the most apparent duty of
the subject, ibr some time past, to^och a
degree as has been predoctive of the most se-
rious mischief.

llere IcamietavQid obtruding a word upon
you with respect to myself. The history of
mv life has •been a history of toleration. By
•nucation, by nature and the habiuof my
lif^, I have been led to indulge toleration. I
never discouraged inquiry. — ^Bold, open de-
bate^ imen argument, honest opinions only
guarded by the principles of chanty,* morality,
good order and aecency-^so euarded, let your
alfument be as free as wind, and your words
as comprehensive as langua^ can speak. If
I have rinisrepresented myseli^ I call upon the
commonity to be witness agarost me. Every
man feeling any regard for the common wel-
fkre ninst acknowledge, that the present mo-
ment is sufficient to raise suspicion, whifch is
evtroonsidered as the bestcentinel of wisdom.
I on now speakine before a number of p^le,
who Irave made 'mrtuBes — ^who are remark*
able for industry — who never forgot the com-
men good, in mirsuing their personal interest,
I ask them, whether Uiis be not a moment for
akrm?-^What! that you should have ackib
ttf traitors in the bowels of your country, and
liave fbiMUd none of them but a few boys snd
n siMier?— Why do you not exert your-
Melvea I — You. acknowledge, that there is a set
of Mple calted Defenders, they come in the
nignt-Uhey take arms, and get money, but
they mean no mischief !*-They take arms : —
Why d^you auflbr them ?— " Why really," an-
owera otae of these supine men, ** I do not
Icnow ! One would not wish,* to be sure, to
SBttke- enemies.'' And what do you expect f
— ^ Why, Ihlit I shall not be the firSf whose
thredtwlllbeeut." Butifyobshooldnotbe
the'firtt^ you'^iU be the^eoond , aAd if not
liie second, yd^ iriU be the third. See what
liaa been the cose in FrtLnce : what a succes-
sion of persons has been mowed down by the
^palace ! Hie duke of Orleans came to 'the
block under the hands of the persons, wheih
lk« himself hiid raised into comcquence. Tliat
nagr be theoase here.

VOL. XXVI.

Anmber excuae is utgbi. ^ If I inqumo
after these who take my arras, they will cut
my throat**' I am not now taking ligiitly^
Wiiat did Swift, who was a man of much pen
Htical sasacity ?— This ootmtry had been
greatly infested by a nest of robbers ; by one
spirited paper, teaching, that each honest
man had strength enough to root out the
niscbief, he obliged th<»n, in a numnier, to
do that which as membere of society, they
ought. They were jmrsued* laid hold of, the
arms were taken from them.— What is attri-
buted to one of ^e Mount- morrea fiimily?-*
With one eword, he Subdued seven, and
brought them to the gallows. I saw the
man's picture, with blood upon his face :—
gforious picture I and glonous story to be
told ! If you have miuds and spirits enter*
tinning any regard for your poientSi vour
children, or the constitution which you bold
dear, can it be doubted^ that, with the as*
sistance of government, the power and the
sinews cf government, if individuals exerted
themselves for a tnontb, these conspiracies
muat be suppressed f — Everv sensible man of
every denomination should step forward — I
mentkm not names— I cail upon all ranks^
whether Protestants, or not; — I call upon alt
dasses of religion to stand up and do their
duty, and suppress a common evil. Who
have been the instruments of it? — men who
ha^« (led from the law, or who have suffered
under it. Can it l>e doubted then, when you
have every man of property to watch and de«
tect abuses of so mischievous a nature, that
they could not be suppressed P — ^Take notice
4f ^very person witbm and without youf
houses — observe what their opinions and oc
enpations are— whera they spend their time,
aiffd how they ore employed. I am not talking
nowtoinfantS) or boys; if due vigilance be
extvttd fofe* a month, a Defender could not
exist for a month within 40 miles of Dublin.
There are either servants, or apprentice-boys,
or workmen. Look then into your houses,
and $ee bow your tenants, domestics and
others Ura employed— examine public-housed ;
see what the general conduct is, that people
do not lose their senses by excess. Want of
moraliW becomes a necessary consequence of
want of sense in such cases. We see in Xhh
great town, swarms at every lane, debauching
the morals of its inhabitants. Men have been
punished by the piltory, for what? For en-
deavouring to corrupt the minds cff the youth
by obscene pictures, and yet I have seen
twenty men, with smiles and smirks, as if
they were pleased and delighted with scanda*
lous representations. What are magistrates
for, if these abuses be tolerated ?— Point yotir
minds to Scotland : — she is a model of tern*-
perancc, ef understanding, of wisdom, Of re-
ligion, of decency to all the worki, and Hht
has thriven accordingly. It is not,'thatthe
6e6t^h are a fortunate people. 'No, it -doet
*ot depend upon fortune; it is igood <^nse,
and good conduct There is itbt a druilfcea

8 F

433]

36 GEORGE IIL

Trials qfihi Dffknii

creature io be met with there in a n^nth.
Whereas here, I am sorrv to sa^, that I have
more pain in keeping my horse from trampling
upoii drunken people of a Sunday than from
«ny care of- myself. In defiance of all de-
cency,- they seem to have come drunk into
the world, and they determine to go drunk out
ef it.

But see the consequence of this : people are
rendered ripe for any mischief. Exert ^rour-
selves then to stop this evil. Call for aid in
this undertaking, and if you find the mans-
trate or the friend disregard you, mark that
man, no matter what his religion or tenets
nay be, whether he carries the prayer-book
or the breviary, the Koran or Qonfucms, if he
do not assist you, when he can, he is a De-
fender, and treat him as such.

Make nien give an account of their conduct.
See what is done, and declare what ought to
be. done. Any act which makes a man acces-
aaiy in felony, makes bim a principal in trea-
son. If he comforts and abets a traitor,
knowing bim to be such, he becomes a prin-
cioal in treason ; therefore it behoves him to
take care how he keeps in his mind the know-
ledge of a man being a Defender. Eveiy man
who protects, who assists or i^ts, upholds
or harbours *a traitor, knowing him to bo
such, is in the eye of the law and in common
sense a traitor, and liable to the penalties of
treason. The next ofience is misprision of
treason, and that is, where a man knows a
person to be a Defender, and conceals it;
there he is guilty of a misprision of treason,
which is punished with the forfeiture of eoods
and chattels and imprisonment for the fife of
the party.

I am stating this in the presence of many
Knowing the profession. If I misstate, let me
be corrected. I am speaking before an audi-
tory consisting of hundreds. Is it net pro-
bable, that- many of those who hear me are
trembling at the idea of having assisted De-
fenders, or having been guilty of misprision in
not discovering them?-^It is tberetore time
to watch their own conduct. I have

Siven them fair warning. I have told them
tie law, as it was my duty to do, at an im-
portant and alarming period. I scorn Uie
consequences so far as they may afiect my own
person. If this infamy is to disgrace your
country (an infamy which it has escaped for
3100 years,, for Jackson was the first traitor
tried here for a century, and you see they are
' thickening and increasing) so may God judge
me as I had rather die to-morrow. I am not
apeaking. for myself. I have means of protec-
tion, which many have not. But your spirit
-and integrity is your best protection — it is Uie
protection of the humblest amone you« Honest
?Hrtue and spirit triumph over aU the vices of
the earth.

Adopt as many of these sentiments as eome
lioxne to your hearts,, and the situation you
are in; I hope I have, in thus addressing you,
done some good i X certainly did not mean to
do any hann*

[456

Mr. AUornty Generai^^U it y^r lordship'a
wish to mention any day for eiecution to be
done upon these men i

Earl of C/mmei/.-— Mention the day your-
self; we will adopt your sentiments.

Mr. Attorney Ueneral, — I had no particular
day in contempla^n. We wish nothing
more, than that of making these prosecu^na
have the effect, which was intenaed, namely,
the effect arising from example.

Earl of C&mme//.— You can have no other
object. One of the prisoners roentioBed with
some sharpness, that a man not recommended
had ten wedu. Do you think a month
will do P

Mr. Attorn^ General — ^My lord, I have na
other object than what I mentioned. But
the compassionate course to be taken is U>
make examples as soon as may be consistent
with humanity — to show the people they can*
not escape punishment and thereby prevent
other fellow creatures from following the like
crimes.

Earl of C2oiMi€//.-^Suppo8e #e appoint this
day fortnight ?

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— My lord, that will
give time enough for those who have power
to extend mercy, if they choose to cio so.
But the prisoners should not entertain such an
idea themselves. I wished the day not to be
too distant, lest the prisoners might indulge
expectations, which were not afterwards to Ee
gratified, wad at the same time not to encou-
rage those who are taught b^ every possible
means, that.govemment is disinclined to exe-
cute the law. Ever^ person in Court has dia-
char^ed his duty, with coolness,' delibemtion,
and impartiality, and my only desire is, that
the prisoners may not be impressed with an
idea that they are not to suffer,- which might
be fiital to them hereafter. And people should
not go away with an idea, that th^teis a
weakness in the government. If a^y maa
mistake me, I cannot speak plainer than I
have done.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain. — From what has
happened this day, I think my brother George
and I should mention why we appointed a
distant day far Weldon. I declare most so-
lemnly, that it was not iirom any doubt of the
propriety of the verdict. But the eircum-
stances were very particular at the time of the
sentence. One Jury upon Lawler's evidence
convicted Weldon. Another jury upon the
same evidence had acquitted LeaiJ ; and it
was clear, that the same Lawler woukl be
again produced at this commission. We could
not foresee what would happen; and if it had
happened, that Liwler was diseredited by m
jury, it would be ouc duty to recommend
Weldon. Therefore a day was appointed fgt
his execution, after this commissieU) form
purpose of ascertaining to the public satis-
faction, whether Lawler was deserving of crex-
dit or not; and that was the only motive;
We should be deserving- of public .qsusure, liii-^
deed we sho\ild receive our own censviey 1^'
^ ....

437} Andn^ (Sennan and others Jbr a Conspiracy. A. D. 1796.

[438

^^ sentenced Weldon. and allowed him to
sufler, and afterwards 'Lawkr should be dis*
credited. I mention tbiS) because in every
ca^ of this kind, it is highly essential, that
Hie public sfaeuld be satisfied.

lir. Baron George.— As judge Chamberlain
has mentioned, that there was no doubt in
the minds of the jud]^ who presided upon
Weldon's trial, as to ms guilt, l think it pro-
per to declare, that I myself have no doubt of
nis guilt. But from -the circumstance of
Leary having been acquitted, we thought the
ends of justice required, that the progress of
justice should go rorwaid in such a manner,
that no event should arise to discredit that
justice. It is not only necessary that judges
sbonld be satisfied ; mit we thought the ends
of ju^ifce required, that occasion should be
eiven to prove the guilt of those persons to
iemonstration. The infliction of such severe
punishment, as is denounced upon crimes of
this sort, ought to be done with the utmost
deliberation, more especially where the crown,
for the safety of the state, is the prosecutor.
There should be nothing hasty, vindictive, or
tessionate, that people may see government in-
tends nothing more than thedisuibution of jus-
tice in mercy. For these reasons, and as in cases
•f this sort nothing like mistake should inter-
vene, we postponed the execution of Weldpn,
that every man in the kingdom might see the
nature or the evidence. But it was not in
consequence of any doubt whatsoever that
rested in the minds of any of the judges. This
was the opinion of Mr. Justice Fmucane, who
is now absent. If he were here, he would de-
clare the same better than I can for him.

Mr. Attorney General. — ^I am apprehensive
irfaat I said ^was.not perfectly qnaerstood. I

had no objection to a distaht day ; and so far'
from it, that if tny humble opinion were ne«
cessary, I did approve of the aelay ; and if my
opinion had been desired, I would have re-^
commended a postponement.

Saturday the 12tb of March was appointed
for the execution,

Bugh CrtaherSf esq. foreman of the city
grand jury, addressed the Court, and read «
resolution passed by the grand jury, express-
ing their sincere thanks to lord chief justice
ClonmeU for his able and spirited address -to
them, and requestinz his Igrdship's permis-
sion to have it printed.

The Earl of Chnntell said he acknowledged
the favour, and was grateful for the compli-
ment conve}'ed by w grand jury. He hoped
what he said made a due impression upon
their minds ; but was sorry he could not com-
ply with their request, as he had not prepared
any notes for the oecasibn.

The following day the high sheriff of the'
county commimicated to his lordship a simi-
lar resolution of the county ^and jury, to
which his^ordship returned a smiilar answer.*

Kennedy and Hart were respited until the
19th of March, when Hart was cfxecuted.
A iarther respite has been granted toKen-
nedy.

^ ^ 1 hope his lordship will excuse me for
presuming to publish this address firom my
own notes. I feel that I have not been able
to do it complete justice, but a wish to pro-
mote the same object, viz. the public good,
has occasioned this publication." Orig: Ed.

617. Proceedings on the Trial of Andrew Glennan, Philip
Kane, Owen Reily, Charles Soraghan, Patrick
KiNSHELA, Michael Sleaven, John Connor, Hugh
Byrne, Michael Walsh, John Ratican, James Car-
michael, James Connor, and James Dempsey, for
a Conspiracy, before the Court holden under a Com-
mission of Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on Monday
February 22nd : 36 George III. a. d. 1796,*

CovMissioir.

Mottdt^ February 9Sdl, 1796.

The Grand Jury havine found the foUowiog
indictment, the persons therein named were
this day arraigned.

^ Taken by William iUdgeway, Esq. Bar-
rister at Law.

Cwijrfyof^AdCiJyl '' The jurors of our
o^DaWm to mu. I ,, j^^^d the king upon
''their oath present that Andrew Glennan
<' of the city of Dublin yeoman Philip Kane
'' Owen Reny Charles Soraghao Patrick Kin-
** shela Michael Sleaven John Connor Hugh
" Byrne Michael Walsh John Ratican James
** Carmichael James Connor and Jaqae*

*S»]

S6 GEOBOE lU.

TriaU of the Defenders^

m^

<< Derops^ of the saU citv yeomeQ beiog
*' p«rson3 of evil name and aishonest con<»
« venation on the3ist of January in the Z6th
« year of thereigq &c. at Suffollc-street &c,
'* contriving ana intending one John Hanlon
<< wrongfully to oppress and aggrieve and him
''to death and final destructioil to bring and
*' cause and procure to be btfoiiebt on the
<' 9ame da^ year and place witn force afid
'** arms &cc. unlawfully wickedly and mali^
*^ ciousl;^ did conspire confederate and acree
fi the said Job^ Hanlon feloniously vilJuUv
'f and of theip malice afore-thought to kill
<f andmurder^lothe evil and pernicious ex*
^' ample of all others in the like case pf-
■' fending and a^pinbt the peace of one said
f* lotd ttieking l^is crown anddignity."

The prisoners severally pleaded Not Ourhy .
-«-And a Jury being swo^n, the prisoners were
given in charge.

Mr. Attorney Gsnerak'^'My Lord, and
Gentlemen of tbe Jury^ Thiji is an indict-
ment against the pri^iieray for conspiring to
put to death John Hanlon, a soldier in the
iartillery. GciUl/eipieiO,. tl^e mentioning of
such a crime alone must impress every mind
with horror ; and I am. sorrv to be able to
state, in the hearing of my tellow creatures,
that it i|B a crime Yfoich is mwing Ipo lami-
liar in the lower orders of the people. I do
not say this with a desire to see conviction
pass upon these people ; but to show how ne-
cesss^ry it is to exi^ni^e m\o Uie master wkh
all pq^sil^le Attention ; that if the prisoners be
guilty, they may be foun4 so, and example
n^ade to deter ot^eiis fjom offending in like
cases.

Gepltleman, the circnni&tanccs of this case
are very few. It is known very well, that se-
ditious conspiracies have existed within this
Kingclom for a considerable time ; they have
been entered into by persons associated as
Defenders. Several persons; havebeen brought
to trial, and some have been punished for
their offences, iyaaottmiog to lu^ treaaoo.
Some who have been, aiccused, and arrested,
yet remain to be tried* In the town of Naaa
therj? At present lemun several persons, some
indicted at the last assizes, and some have
been apprehendedi since — all charg^ with
some species of crime or other, which fall
under the general denopinntion of Defender-
ism.* Among thjsse men, remaining in a
gaol of Naas is a man of the nam of Garar
cen, who lived near KJlcock. He stands
charged with several ofifenoes, and will be

* ** At the Spring assizes for Kildare, 1796,
three persons who. led been inctiolied lor high
treason submitted, and thr^ iadi^t^d. for ad*
ministering unlawful ot^ths were found guilty
upon the testimony of Hanlon. Three men
trere found ^ilty for being concerned in
shuutine at Mr. Uyan, and two others, iodict-
ed for the same ofiencCi submitted.*'— Ori^,

brought 1)Ql trial next.week.* He is brothor^
in-law of Glennan» the prisoner, dentleman.
the prisoner, Glennan^ b a dairi^man, ana
lives in Bow- street, in ^e city of Dublin.. It
has been the diabolical pohcy, adopted \^
these neopky to pcevent tbeir ai^pciates ^om
being Drqught to iusticog whep • apprehended,
b^ assassinating thc^ persons st^pposcd to be
witnesses agaitftst them. Glennan conceived
the design of assassinaSj^lg John Hanloni wha
he supposed would be a vjrit^efljs against tbc)
prisoners in Ni^Sf and among the rest ag^st
nb brotherMn-bw» A man of the n^e of
Tnomas Smith is a gunner in thi; artilleiy.
He was ki^bwp to Glennan for soate time, and
was high m lus confidence*. Smith had in a
way that he will describe to you,.assQci^^
himself at a distant period back with sooic^
persons, who had ei)tered into tb^se oonspi««
racies. He had remained with them but a^
ajhort whUcy whenhe became sensibly of the
situation ii^ which he stoo^,, anid made know^
to ijovernif ent the conspiracy which exisled
against it. G(ennan», being- desirous to yvo^
cure U»e acquittal of Gavacen, apd the otners
in Naas, conceived, that through . Smith, tha
!M)ldief in the artiUety,, be might easily efihel
the ^sassination of panlon, woo he supposed
would be a witness against the prisoners ia
that town.

Gentlemen, in order to bring tp effect thW
purpose, some time in the beginning of Janur*
ary^ he sent fos Smith to come to his house.--)
South obeved the summons, and on Simdajfj^
the 3rd of Januaiyp he came to the hmpse of
Glennau at Bow-tiridge. Glf ninan there tpldj
Smith that there were several Ddendeis re*
maining for t^ial in the gaol of Naas, and
aeked ^im if he knew Haalon, who Jbad
some time before enlisted. Smith said
he did. Glennan then said, he was to
be a witness against the Defenders In
Naas, that he must be murdered, and he
fold him tlAt he expected throii^h^tne ineaiis
of Smith to be able to effect bis purpose.
A(ker som^ farther oo|];ver9atioa, i| was aereed,
that a meeting should be had at the house
of Carmiehael7 who kee|»8 a public house in
Thomas- street — A meeting of the *' boys,"
as ihe^ denominated it— »upon Sunday the
24th of January, in order to confer upon the
means of effecting thtsir plan. Upon the 94th
afimith came to the hbusd^ of Cainichael and
there be met Glennan and several of the per-
son! sow al the bar,andtbeielbey did confer
togeth^ upon the means of assassinating
Hanlon. They de8ired> that Smith should
prevail with Hanlon to come to town upon
the ensuing Sund^ to Canpichael's, where
they would meet Ulennan, and the rest of
the associate!, that ifaajr would aooompany
Smith and Hanlon back ay in, and throw turn
mto the Liffey, as th^ walked along tha

■ ■ ■ ■ I ■ Ml. ■ t I. ■■ ■* I
'< Gavacen was afterwards convicted of
administering an unlawful oath, upon tbf tc^
timony of one Kelly.*' — Orig, Edit.

4417 Andreto Glcnnan andoth^s/nr ^ Conspiracy. A. D. 1796.

[448

paih. Smith coflpmimicated this scbeai« to
serjeant-iDsyor Lane of tbo ui^ikry v^ Qb^r
pelixody who directed Smith to go to townac-
GordiDg to the apqptoii>tinfQty and to bxiBg
Hanlon along with bim. Accordingly on)
^dajr eveniog they went; %9geth9r, Uanion
accompanying Smith. In their way to lowD^
Uank>a askeo Smith, ibr what purpose they
were seat to town at that hour, in the eveoK
ing ; npeo^ whiqh, Smith dispWaed to Hanlon
the purpose for which they wefe sevt. Hhn*
loQ thei^ hesitated to go, Uil Smith told him
he was lajie^ for that alderman Aleiandev
and Alderman Tweedy were infennod of the
whole transactioa-rtliwit a partv of the peace
officers were assembled at WatHog-stseety
near the house of Carmichael, and it was
^eed, that a person ahotild be atnl in to
give a signal, men the party were aiaemhie^
that they mi^t be arrested.

Smith and tianlon then proceeded to town,
and in their way tbe former stepped intathe
faouae of Oleiman, wtho expreasefthis hapj^i-
ness, said he was ' glad to see the lad, desired
them to go tp Cannicha^rs, and the ^ boys"
would fouow. Smi^h a^d Uanlon acootdiDgly
went to Carmichaers ; there- they ibund two,
cr three, a»d preoeetly they were Joined by
others, who addressed Smith as if they baa
not seen him before. They talked toother
for a whiley and whispered somewhat aiioirtr
the dGsig;n, but not in the hearing of Hanlon,
though m bis view, «o that he oould net go
away without beiog pevceived* The signal
was then given— the j^r^ caOMS in— the per»
sons at the bar were all arfeate^and inslaatly
committed*

This, ^entlemeiii is a siale of the faets
wluch wiU be proved, and if you believe
them, tbey necessaiily draw the coachisioo,
that the prisoners are guilty of the offence
charged against them. Some other incidental
drcumstances will come out, hut Ihegr do not
go directly to the ftvcts charged* though they
go to establish them ; — they will be VM h^
Smith, and they eivt credit to his evidence, if
he required conooeialieiu Gentlemen; he is
not an accomplice-^-he had n» iateatma to
commit the crime — his object was to prevent
i^ if he could. It will appear^ when the ma*
gistrates came, these people pulled (Mipers
from their pockets, and threw Hwn under
the seat— papers directly evtwdng their in-
tentkm of committing bogh tieaao*. One of
those papers was the Defender's catochiim,
in ewcess wosds dechtriag their relianoe upoa
the French Convention, and that their obfect
wiaa» to dethreoe all Ubga« Upon some were
found papers of a like tendency. This shows
clearly their intention to eommil the crime.
Smilh will be eorroboiatcd by tiM evidence of
the magistrates and o^iet neraans. When
the facts shall be pfove^ tnere can bo no
doubt of tbe prisooera^ guilt : and if they be
guilty, we can only lament, thai crimes ot the
deepest dye can be immahed but as a misde-
Pieaooc.

Tliomoi^ imUh sworo^-i^Examioed l^ Mr.
SolicUor General,

Do you recollect |he Sfd of January last f-~
I do.

Do yOu remember to have called upon any
body that day?«h«At the house of Andrew
Glenmm, No. r, Bowb ridge t-— there he is
[pointing at the prisoner m thededc.1

Had you any conversation with him^
—Yes: he treated me to a beef-steak, and
then took itie out, and gava me two potS' of
porter.

What ooiMrersalion had you with blm? —
The first person that broke tlie discourse
was Glennan's waiii) She asked me, if therd
was a recruft in the artillery of the naane of
Hanlon.

What aaswer did you make F--*-! lold> her, I
did net know him> nor did I at the time;—
I then recollected and said, ' I> did know
bim, that be lived a ibw deera iVem me.
Gknnan said, yon are the very man- the busi-
ness hes upon; hemmlhe seized; I shall
way lay him, and kill him.

Did he asogn atoy othtrteieohrf^-GIemian
said, there was to the amount ef eleven De^
iendeva in Maaa, one of 'whom was hvother-in«
law to him, (Glennan), aod Hanlon was Co
prosecute them at the next assises^

C^m^^-Did he aiiywhat they were' iir
for? .. ♦ ! I '.J '

H^^nea— For Defenderism. , ''

Mr« Mkkor G«i<rai.^Yeu sand ' one of
persons confined was Gavosen t-- Yer: hift
Uras brother to Mrs. O}eniao«

How cane yon to bo in terms of intimacy
with Glennan P— I wiia ssmm in Janeary
1795j as a Deteder in Jaities Doyle's house:
George^»iq|Hay: and Gleimsn and Doyle
stood hyy as eommapduig olicers of the re^-
ment. '

TfaKfr connexion subsided P— Yee it did.

After the conmrsatioB terminated, was any
appointment made P-^Yes : I was to come as
conveniently as I coidd,*and to make* up an
intimacy with Hanlmi in thoiMantlme> and
bring him to Glennan*s house*

Yout belong to the regiment of arl&lfery ^^
Ida

You were then in that regiment ?-^I vres.

Did you inform any person of ^is coover-
aalion P<MM.Wfaen I came home, and found
Haatoa vms to he murdered, neat morning
wpon parade I catted seijeant-major Lane
aside, and told him the whole. I told him I
was to set Hanlon, ahd Glennan was to mur*
dar him. I met Glennan afterwards, when I
went to Georce's- quay, and WHliam Keeling,
and James Waid, Defenders. They go by
< so many names, it is hard to know them.

Did* you go anjr where f— Yes, tbey
brought me into a pub]W*heuso.
CoorL-^They were Defenders ^
Witriesi. — ^Yes.

Mr. SoUciltvr Oeaerai.— What passed ?-^
Glennan opened the disoourse, and informed

443]

36 GEORGE III.

Triali qfihe Defenders'^

[444

the other two that I was the man who
could set Hanlon, and hring him forward to
be mtiVdered.

You mean Glennain the prisoner ?-^The pre-
sent man there.

What farther did he say?-.-! was to meet
him as soon as possible again.

Was that part of the conversatitm? — On
that day it was^ and on or about the 84th of
January.

For the same business ? — Yes.

How soon afLer did you meet them ?-^n
the 94lh of January.

Did yott see Hanlon between that day and
th^ former <lay? — I saw him upon duty, but
bad no. conversation with him.
. Did you see him upon the 24th?— I do not
know the exact day : — but I had no conversa-
tion with him. ' I had no conversation with
him three times in my life, until I was sent
to have him murdered.

What happened upon the S4th ?— *I went to
Glennan's upon Bow-bridge. Word was left
ibal hie was gone to Cannichael's, Si Thomas
street.

Alentbn whether, you met Glennan at Car-
michaers ?— I did.

Is Carmsclnel at the bar ?-*-He is r there he

is [pointing to himJ
Who el

else was there ? Was there any other ?
*-Ye% • Patrick Kinshela, Michael Sleaven or
Shanagan-^to the best of my knowledge he
was there.

, Aiety6u certain whether he was there or
not? — ^I am positive.

Do you see any body else who was there ?
—Yes a {;ood manjr ;— no not that day.

What conversation happened in Uie pre*
seopeofthese you have mentioned upon the
84th?— The conversation iJbat' happened that
day with Kinshela, Sleaven and Glennan was
for me to brine in Hanlon.

Was Carmidiael preiseht f— No, he was at-
tending his business in the house.

Was he present at any part of the conver-
sation ?.>Not belonging to Hanlon.

Now mention the conversation between
the other persons upon that day?— I was to
brins in Hankm ana they were all to muider
Hanlon upon the Long Meadows going from'
Bowbridn. I was asked, could I oring Han-
lon next Sunday. I said, I did not know, the
duty being severe,and perhaps I mig^ht be on
duty mjTself. or he might. Sleaven said, ^ you
must bring him in, I have been watching a
week for him, and if I wait until Sunday it
will be a fortnight; if another Sunday it will
be three weeks*'' I said, I wouM call upon
Glennan on Thursday, and let him know whe-
ther I oottld bring in Hanlon on Sunday, or
not.

Did any conversation happen about what
they were to do with Hanlon?— To murder
him upon the Long Meadows, and throw his
body mto the river.

C^rf .— How many knew that purpose ? —
Glennan, Kinshela, and Sleaven.

Ceurt, — ^Any body else at the bar? —No
body else at the bar. •

Mr. SoUcUor General. — ^You ^undertook to
come in on Thursday : did you come in ? — I
did.

Whom did you see? — Glennan at his
house.

What happened ?^He told me he saw Kin-
shela, and asked me if I could bring in Han-
lon—•! told him I could — he told me, before
he would eat his breakfast next morning he
would be with Kinshsia, and give hhn word,
and they would be fully prepared for the mur-
der of Hanlon.

Did you bring Hanlon the next Sunday f
— I did, by order of serjeant major Lane from
parade.

Then during this time you had frequent
communications with seijeant major Lane ? —
I had every day: as any thing passed, when
I came home, I let serjeant major Lane
know it.

:Y*(ni came on the Sunday following?— I
did.

Where?— ^ To the house of Glennan,

Hanlon walked with vou ?— He did till we
came half way through the fields when he
stopped and said, ** now Smith, where am I
going,"

Qmri, — Where was tliat ?<*-'About half-
way between' Island-bridge and Bowbridge.

Ofurt, — In the Long Meadows P — ^Yes.

Owrf.— What hour of the day ? — It was
coming the dusk of the evening — we were at
Glennan*s at night hW^ and at this time we
were half a mile from his house.

Mr. Solicitor General. — What answer did
ydu make to Hanlon ?— I told him he was
going to be murdered. He made a halt and
said he would not come. I told him, he should
come, and with the help of God I would bring
him home safe.

Did he consent? — ^He came forward and
said, '^ take care, perhaps they might poison
me unknown to you."

Cotirf.— Who did he mean by they} — 1
told him the secret — ^the whole business from
beginning to end, as we were going through
the fields.

Mr. SoUeitar General,»—Yoa satisfied him?
—I did.

You came to Glennan's ?— Yes.
Was he at home? — ^He was, after dining;
there was a man standing in the floor with
him with the appearance of a gentleman with'
boots and good clothes ; I do not know who
he was.

Did the gentleman in the boots say any
thing? — ^No.

Did Glennan say any thing?— Hedkl :— he*
asked me •' Had I Hanlon.''-^ told him I had.

Did he ask it in the presence of the gen-
tleman ? — ^He did, out plump beforeJiim.

Coiirl.— Where was Hanlon at uiat time ?
— ^He was outside of Glennan's house.

Mr. Solicitor Oefiem/.— Did Glennan make
any answer wh^n you told him ?— Glennan

nS] Andren GUnnan and oiher$Jbr a Conspiracy. A. D. 1796.

[446

Mid, ** wheel him up to CarmichaeVs and
all the boys will be up after you by-and*by."

Court. — Did you underataud what the boys
meant ^ — ^To be sure, the party that was to
murder llanlonthat Glennan was to bring.

Court. — In the dusk of the evening T—
Yes.

Mr. Solicitor General. — You went up to
Carmichaers ? — ^Yes.

What happened there ? — ^We had two pots
of threepenny.

Wlio? — Hanlon and I; — ^nobody else had
come there ; Glennan had ordered me to call
for what 1 liked, and not to spare cost —
when we called for the threepenny in walked
Patrick Kinshcla.

Who else came in?-«-There came about six
in all.

Mention their names? — I cannot give
their distinct names. But I can show them.

Show them?«-Simon Walsh was there.
There were ten in all, and one escaped.

Point them out? — I do not know their
names— -Philip Kane was the man who came
forward to the counter, and said '< he was the
man, who would do for Hanlon V^ Andrew
Glennan was there— jOwen Reily was there —
I was often in his company as a defender
Byrne said he would convey Hanlon
a piece of the way home. — The prisoners are
all in different appearances from what they
were in at the time. I have no call to say to
Carmichael whatsoever, as to the murder of
Hanlon.

Did the^ all come at once ? — Kinshela came
with the first party, and then the other party
came in.

Did they converse together ?*-The word
was this : — they were to ask, " who was with
roe.'* — I was to«answer, '' Hanlon a recruit, a
friend of mine, who came in to take a drink."

Did they ask ^pu P — ^They did, and I told
them — we were sitting in CarmichaePs front
tap>room, opposite the fire, as you go in, vou
turn to the nght — we were sitting there when
they came in. Kinshela and the party moved
to the center tan-room when they came in,
and they called tor two large jugs of punch,
and some beef-steaks.— Ine jugs held two
quarts, or three pints; we dramc until such
time as Glennan and his party came in. ^

When Glennan and his party came in, was
there any farther conversation? — ^The same
as before.

Did Glennan ask you, as the other had ?—
Sorely : they all shook me by the hand, and
I thought they would force my arms from my
shoulders. — ^I wanted to be near, and got near
the door; alderman Alexander's man was in
the front tap- room drinking with another
person.

He was there you sav ?— He had been with
me there the night before, I showed him
where to |U piivately, and how to act for takr
ing these peopl^. I told him I would give
him a signal, when to take the people.

Do you know his name?— No. t . t

How long did you sit before the signal waa
given? — We were not sitting long— -iSome
made me sit on their knees— Sleaven was
running about like a distracted man, and he-
sud *' when this business is completed, I will
bring 18,000 men to Dublin on the Friday foU
lowing."

Did Glennan hear? — Cert^nly, and Kin-
shela too.

Did alderman Alexander's man hear?—
No. ^

You talked about a sign, what sign ? was
it a Defender's sign ?— No ; I was to take off
my hat, to scratch my head, and give a cough
— I did so, and alderman Alexander's man
went out for the party.

Was there any farther conversation between
you relative to the party P— Nonfe. We sat
down, and the second toast we drank was,
<< bad luck to all bad Defenders."

Was that so loud as that all the company
could hear ? — It was, the whole house could
hear it : — it was not hid in a bushel.

Afler that did any thine remarkable hap^
pen? — I do not know what happened betweea
Hanlon then, because I went to the door,
near the front tap-room ; but I had my eye.
upon Hanlon, for fear of any danger to him :—
they were all so fond of me, some shaking
me by the hand, and almost pulling my
arms off.

How soon after did the guard come ?— I had.
not time to take a glass of ptmch before they
came.

What happened afVer? — Colonel Alexander
came in, and that gentleman [aldemuui
Tweedy].

What did tbey do?— They desired the coq»
stable to make me prisoner, and take me one
side out of their company, for fear they should
hurt me. The alderman then took the pri«
soners one after another, and desired me
pinch his arm as any of the party passed ; a
man was then put upon each side of the. pri^
soners, until they were brought to the ofiice.

Were they searched ?— -They were.

Did vou see any paper ?— No.

Hanlon was there that time? — He was all
the time, and can tell what passed. There
was a paper taken out at alderman. Akxander'a
office, and read.

Out of whose pocket ?— I do not know.

Thomas Smith cross-examined by Mr.
M'Nalfy.

How long have vou been in the. Artillery f
— ^incethe 15th of April, 1795.

Was it before or after you enlisted, you
were sworn a Defender ? — Before.

Were you intimately acquainted with Glen-
nan before you went mto the Artillery ?— I
wasL

Did Glennan hold any conversation with
you about going into the Artillery ? — ^I'll tell
you the reason I went in. I was a Protestant*
all my life, and so was my father and grand-
fether since king William's time. 1 was.

447]

36 GEORQB IIL

Trials of the htfenden

obliged to^tde my bibte and priiyer4)0Dk, and
I coosblked with my wife, and determined to
go into tbe army, to |)ractisfe my proftuioa as
usual. I was obKgcd to make my daughter
deny that sbe was « Ptot^stom boro, and
make ber say, she went to mass.

[llefe the witness was examined by the

Court.]

When did yau heiir of tfa^r intantions f— In
February, 1795.

Whi« did you -hear ^-Tbey were talking in
CoiiMtr's hoase«— we expected every day a
massacre and rebellkni was to break out — no
pFOteslaQt was to be left alive. We were to
serve under sir Edward Bellew, and were
sworn to that. Tbe oath was, lo serve under
Jamas Cole, sir Edward Bellew. Nappet
IWidyi and Hamilkm Rawan. There were
sheets of papdr, and they swore to it» as they
said. I gave information. They were to have
no king— they said ** we wlft reeover our
estates, sweep clean tbe Protestants, kill the
kird lieutenant, and leave none allve."-^there
were a good many more by.

What do you say were their determina-
tkms^ *as you can recollect them?— Tbe oath
was, to serve sir Edward Bellew, James Cole,
Napper Tandy, and Hamilton Rowan-*-to
serve fVanee and Ireland.

What did you say about the lord lieutenant ?
•^Wewere one morning at Connor's, Glen-
naUy Bempsy, and others^-^we came to a re*
solution of shooting the lord lieutenant.

Upon what day was that f-*-'! do not know ;
it was upon a Sunday, as he passed through
the Park. We were to take the masatine m
tliePark^ the Castle of £)ubUn, and put ail
thiB neMli^i therein to death.

Y«tt said you were in constant expectation
of somethSngf— Of the rebellion breaking out.
^ Wbtfe^-^ln Dublin.

When did that commenceP^Last April,
1796.

How do you kiMw it was in Ajfril hst?-^It
was sometime about April, or March ; it Was
about that time I hstea— I gave infbrtnation
so'often to captain Burgh and to the nbblemen
in Dublin and Iceland, and seeing no notice
taken-of it| I w«asure I wouMeometo a bad
end.

ToWhom^did yon give information beside
captain Burgh ?-«>.I was brought to the Castle,
and saw three or four lords with stars. 1 do
not know who they were ; captain Burgh knew
#llD)they were.

You gave information you say e^fly in-
1795 ^»Jld)d in JafltiBfy,^795.

To whom N-*To captain I^egge attd'Ctml^'
Btrgh atid'otller gentlemen, I <do not 'know

You said you saw persona with stars?—-
I 'did. •

Do'yonr«fmeniber hew Vn^y P^-To'the be^f
of mv knowledge three xk %^x.

tWhat piurtoftheGastle? — As you^go'lnto
tb« Uiiper €betle-gate, from the tewer, un the

[448

left' there is a door h) the corner, I wfcnl in
there. i

Were you examined ? — I was.

Who examined you ^-Tbe gentlemen fhere.

Were there any gentiemen of the bar there f
•^-IdoAotknow.

What hour of the day or night was it? — It
was <arly ;— -in the menth of April. When I
spoke of January, it was in tbe evening.

Were yea examined another time ?— Yes,!
saw captain Burgh there.

Who do y«iii mean by noblemen?— The
noblemen I saw there. There was another
gentleman with captain Burgh there. I did
all I could to get forward, but could get no*
thing done.

ItL what situation were y^?— ^I kqpt a
porter>house in Garden lane.

Vou were twice examined at the Castle T —
I was.

Consider before you answer*, by virtoe of
your oath, was there any person there dresseil
like a lawyer, at any time you were examined }
-—There was a person dressed in black, but I
did not know whether he was a lawyer.

Do you know him ?— "No.

How many were there ?-^Three or four.

Wiiere did you see the people with stars f— >
In that room.

•Did you know any of them ?— There was a

Sntloraan with a'Small bkKJc p^tch upon his
:e, I M not know him.

What was the last time you were examined
in the Castle?— In the month of April.

First In January ?-— Yes.

Were the* same penM>ns present the last
time as at first ? — ^No : first there was captains
Burgh and Legge and a gentleman, I believe
the secretary ot the Boara of OtKinance.

Who the second time?«>'4^he gentlemen
with stars, and captain Bur{;h wascalled upon
to see whether I had told him before.

He is alive?— Yes.

Was he present at the examination ?-^No,.
but be eame forward, being sent for, and spe-
cified that I told him before.

Cro8s*examination resumed.

Ton iti order to preserve to yourself the free
exeitlse'Of youV religion, weht into the artil-
lery ?-^Inoraer to presei^a tree tife, and tbe
exe^cise'of'my religion, and to save a number
of innocent-persons in the kingdom.

Before vou went into the Artillery, yon had
iieenan Old Defender ?«--I had.

'BuC'ifOU became so frightened at the wipk*
«dii§M^^hat society; that you went into tlie

imiii«py?— I did.

-^Hotr'soda after VOtt Were sworn didyo6
eoiitoMtlM r4s61n^k of shooting tire lord
lieutenant? Did you give information ?•-«•
thAt'WAs befbre I went into the Artllter^.

Bid yoU'give atoy idforroatioiVof the mten^
tiori to sho6t the lord iientenant uttlil yon
went into the Artilleiy ?'~I -liidr I hired %,
chair, aidd paid eig|htcel> pence forU'tagfrlOt
Burgb. ' ♦

4id} Andrew GUrmm ani oAari^fijfr a, Conspiracy. A. D. IfSiSb

V^Qi^ l<W(«iie9 the resolution «9us takef ?
•^At tt^i time, but 9( ^ay or two after. { to^
no time, out went iramediately afler.

\f^j^ ^ou imipe|Ji«te)|^.9n it^ occurring to
Xouir min^ that ^Qur religion, and life were in
Atnger, give ap your connexion with Defen-
ds P^fdljid tiU i^«y followea vof^ to Cbapel-
izod.

' Did y.ou noA go to the house of Gleanaa?—
But it was a long time before that, tbe> fol-
lowed me to. CbapeUsod.

You followeq him to Bow-bridgp? — .
Yesy but he and many others followed me

Did ;f Qu assign any reason for g;oiRg into
the Artillery ? — I did : I went for poverty.
They asked me why I did not apply ? I said, I
WMiw not aslB any fVieiklv

Is not the Artillery known to be a protest-
%lit corps r— It k a free corps for wy v^
who conducts himself well, and promotion ia
k;/^ for any man*

Did y^i^ ever see 9jk advertisement furro-
€ruUin£ 1^1 the ArtUtexy r-rl did.

Do thegr not state that the mc^n muat be
protest^t9, aad of^ood char^ter ?-rThattime
va3« hut na^ tbey take any men in the way,
and if they oonduct themselves well may be
promoted.

W^ not the qualification inserted lathe
last advertisement ? — X did not see one thesis
five years.

Is it not the custom to insert it dowii to
tb;s da^ {—I do not . believe it ; of a Sunday,
when W9 parade at Chapelizod every m^n is
dressed and when church bell rings, the
drum beats, and those who go to mass, turn
to the tefl, and it is free far the ei^erciaa of
reiiaioii, every roan does as he pleases.

xou and Glennao have been acquainted for
ft coosider^e tune ?— From tlie 1st of Janu-
ary 1795.

You kept a porter-house in Gardea-laneP —
Idid.

Did. QlfADan resort your house there ?— He
ixl '

J]dd you at that time go to any place of
worship?— No., I went ,two or three times
inth v^tm to mass, but never went witbip
^de ^ church door.

YoM became a Defender in 1705 ?— I did.
'And you contmued do^n to April— the time
jrou ei|listed?— >! did.

po you not believe that yoqr entering intp

[460

And did you netza a{piie to ibe house of
Qleetoau?— I did wTlh Hapjon.

Did you not go without lumN-^ I did, oAcn.
alor;e«

Diid you not conceive from the description
you b<a^ given oL 6lennan, that he was
oae who would sweep oifthe proie^tants? — I
was.

And yet you went to him? — I went th^^
thruugh fearofmy life.

From that fear you went into the Artillery ?
— ^J did. I went to Glen^um*a by order of
aeneaot Lane.
' Hanlon ai^d you were not intimate ?-^15o.

The first m lunation he had, t^at be waa
to be murdcr^c^ was upop the hank of th^i
river ?— It was.

Qetween Island-brklge andChapelisod ?— -It
waai

You were afraid of be'u^ eut off by thesft
people, and ouitionj^d Ueoioh to.defe^d himt
self? — ^No4 I told Vim nottxis^ ^iU v^ lel^
Chapelizod,. • / / .

He was unarmed ^-No^ he had hiisVi^^jajrvs^

Hs^you been on terms of intim^-v witn all
the pniancrs?— I was often in their, coo^
pany but did not know their names; thes^
Ue^end^ra give tlieinselves ^Jbtr^ofdin^ry
names.

Are YOU so well acquainted^ 98 tg siyear to
their faces ?-^I>id. I ftot do so already?— J
swear they are the men who were b^ t,o. mux"
der Hanioa and none other.

Do you take upon you to swear, \\\aX alHU<?
ten men in the dock were present, and over •
heard the conversation respecting the luurdeif
—I am positive they were all consenting, aiu)
were to assist in it.

Was the proposal to murder Hanlon so
loud that every man could hear it? — Cer-
tainly.

How large was the room?— -It was a largp
room.

I am speaking of the last ni£ht-*-Sure they
did not talk of the murder ot Hanlon before
his face.

Did any person come in ?— Xt was a frcft
house.

Did apy person come in, and who were at
the fire side ? — I am not positive.

Are you positive they were all present at tlic
consul talion to murder Hanlon f — ^No, thuv'
were twenty there

Now, I ask you, were all the mfSf. at tbr
the Artillery intimated to these people that \ bar in the ruom that night ? — ^I am not pobj-
you wefe% prQtestanl?-^No, I am pofitiye it tive.
did not. } Who were there the first night? — ^ThcK?

Did yau contii^ue to deny your < religion | wore a or^t OMioy-T-but all ^ho wece taken
Ml:^?— ^0, 1 went to church fireel^asaoy - qntbe&str^ightby my direction* kuew tV
other maiP. I p^^

Aj(1^ tlu^t did y«u visit Glenn^ ikhI ^

fibers ^s A Defovder \^ di4.

When they follow^ you, as yoi^ fj^ ^o,
Chapelisod, had you no apprehension, tb^t
t^ese ipi^Q, who w^e to sweep tbe prote^nts
W!oul4 sweep yoi^?--! had apprehenaioos o(it
and seldom expected any thing else.

VOL. XXVI.

John ^aiiibii sworn. — Examined byMr.^m^

SergeaiU.

1)0 yoQp sepi^mbff theSlatof Ja9Vai7l]^tt^
—I do.

Did you receive any order from Mrj^f>^i
CRfi^ La^ t^4»y,?^4 ^

S G

4513

S6 GEORGE III.

TriaU qfth* Hffenifttt-'

t4Sf

s..
.ir

What was it?— To come into town along
with Smith, I did not know for what, till I
came half way— Smith stopped to draw water
«— Smith said, yo^are going to be murdercJ/'
—I sud, I wouM not go-^he said not to fear
and told me th^ way. I then said, I would

fo, if it was to |he mouth of a six pounder.
^e came to Gl^nnan's, I leaned my shoulder
to the door, Smith went in, and Glennan said
** wheel np the lad to Carmichael's, and drink
the best."— We did so.— They came in two
parties, five, or six each. They removed us
from the place, being a small room, they took
Smith upon their knees^ they were so elad to
see him. I drank heartily sure enough, and
after some time, I said it was growing late,
-ht I should be put into the guard house. He
went to the door, and a croira came in. I was
pleased to se^ them, and took courage and
crank hMrty. Smith was taken and the rest
brought together. Tbev drank, ^present
death and confusion to all bad Defenders.''—-
that was against me for betraying them.

You were to give information against De-
fenders?—I gave information aeainst a party
for a design to kili the rev. Sir. Walsh at
Kilcoclk

Point out the men ?— I think they were all
there(here he pointed to several of tbeprisoners)
— itwas eandle lights and I was in muchconfii-
sion but I give my affidavit this man was there
(pointing to Owen Reily) and this man (Peter
Ksnshela) and this man (Simon Walsh) and
this man (Andrew Glennan) and this man
(Hueh Byrne.)

Were all the persons there that niriit taken
into custodv ?— They were, ten I Siink and
tbelandlonf. .

Cross-examined by Mr. Greene.

How long were you acquainted with these
men before P-*-Never, not one man.

How long were you in their company that
niehtf— Perhaps three Quarters of an hour.

Were they not divided ny separate benches?
'-No, because the first party thatcame in took
IIS out of a small bench, and brought us into
a spacious place.

You were a good deal terrified f — I wascer-
tainly.

You had not seen them before N— No, not

How then are you so certain as to their
being in the same place ?*~By their exprefr-
stons. *

You cannot say what dress they weris in ?-*-
J dkl not examine their dress.

Hive they the same now which they had
fSMi tti^t^^•I am sure thev have part of it,
I swear to the five men—the very identical
sneq,

Thar aospeeted you to be a Defender?— I
was taken to be a Defender by a North-coun?
trymah at Rikod^ a stone cutter, and I was
obtiged 10 swear, or I would not come ou|r
alive.

> Jou drank veiy hnrti]y ?^Three pints and
r half of punch.

How much had you taken before the croud
appeared?— Two pots of beer and two jugs of.
piMich.

You mentioned to Smith that yon were
afraid of staying?— I did, seeing them going
about.

You knew the officer had given you leave
to go ? — ^He did. But I did notknow, notseeing
the constables coming, how much danger there
might be.

Mr. Greene.— Did you declare the ntgbt the
persons were taken, that you had no charge
against Reily.

ITifnesi.— What charge could I have against
any of them, but for thSr oaths and dechnir
tions.

Mr. Alderman AUgandir swonu^Exa-^
mined by Mr. SmHa.

Do you recollect getting informatbn from
Smith r— I do.

What was the time and what the nature of
the information ?— A petson called upon me
at William-street, and said, that a person of
the name of Smith would give imbrmatbo
against sworn Defenders, and who were
swearing Defenders, and that if I would meet
him at any time, where he would not be sui-
spected, he would meet me. I appointed the
next morning at ten o'clock, he came and he
told the storv exactiy as he related it here.

You heard him dve his testimony here ?—
I did.

And the information he gave you was ex-
actly the same as the account he gave here?
—Exactly.

Did you mention the time this happened f
— It was the Thursday before these people
were taken up— the 98th I believe. I fixed
with Smith at the office to call at iny own
house at four o'clock, and 1 sent for aldennan
Tweedy. Smith came and ggveexaminatiooa
against these people. I agr^d that he shouki
go to the house with my men, in older to
take them when they were assembled by giv- ,
ing a signal. At the time am^inted two men
were stationed at the house>— I was told the
sien was made— I came down trith a party to
Carmichael's house and took them. I spoke
to Smith, and desired him to identify them.
He askea me, how ? I told hhn, when I asked
any of them what his name was, if he was of
the party, to give my arm a pinch. I asked
each man his name, and Smith gave me a
pinch.

How inlmy?— 'Ten,and the landloid— he
was not sitting at the table.

Can you id^tify them ?— Six of them I can
—-their dvesses are all' altered. That nultty
Sleaven or Shamrogiia I know very well.
Glennan I recollect perfectly well. I remea»-
ber RcaW too-^we biou^t them all dp to ^
derman Tweedy's office, and he.oonmilled
them.

Was Ihe alderman there at the time the
prisoners- were brought?— He was at the of-
fice.

ibS} Awirem Glennan and othtnjbr a

A. D. 1796.

[454

yoa tM imy tiling mortf-^Tberf wm
^ paper under the table, a sort of Catecbism.
He pulled another paper out of the pocketi of
one of the party. Here are the papers.

Hr. Alderman TVpee^^ sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Wwthing^om.

Did alderman Alexander give into your
care any persons on tbe Slst of January lastf
— He<Kd.

Look round^and try if you see themf-*-I
do; to tbe best of my belief tbey are tbeper*
«oos. I put them into a dock, and took them
tNitoneby one, and Smith identified them
«1L I cave them to tbe constable.

Who Drought them to Newgate from your
office f — ^My constables.

Hawe you any of those constables here ? —
No.

Did you find any thing upon any of the
prisoners P— >I found a Bible, and a manual,
and this pocket-book, in which there was a
paper with some powder in it Under the
table where they were sitting I found a num-
ber of bits of paper, which 1 endeavoured to
put tiwetber, but I could not. Under the
«eat I round this kind of catechism.

You sent the men to Newgate who were
^yven to you ?— I did.

J^mkwm Oregg s«vam.— Examined by Mr.
Mkiior GeneraL

You received all these men atibe bar from
«lderman Tweedy on the 1st of February last?
— 4dkl [Here he mentioned all their names].

Uader a warrant from the alderman ?— Y«s.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ridgemt^.

Nektier Connor aor Dempsey were deli-
vered to you at the same time with the others ?
^-They were not.

K ere the papers were offered to be read,
he counsel for the prisoners objecting,
that DO paper couM be read, except such as
was actually found upoa the possession of one
of the prisoners, or satisfactorily connected
with ime of them, the paper found under the
aeat was not read.]

(The following paper, found by alderman
Tweedy upon one of the prisoners was read.]

* Are you a Christian?—! am. By what?
«— By babptism. Who babptised yoa?^
« St John. Where?— In the river Jordan.
« What did he call vou ?— To be loyal To
^ who ? — To God and my brothers. Are you
^consecrated?—! am. To what?— To the
^ National Convention— to auell all nations
^ — to dethrone all kinp, ana plant the Tree
** of Libert|[ on our Insh land— whilst the
^ French Defenders will protect our cause,
^ and the Irish Defendem pull dowa tbe Bri*
« tish laws. Which is thefirst T ?-The Tree
^ of Liberty. Who planted it ?—The duke of
^ Orleans. Where ?— !n his own Lawn.
** Bow hidi are you?— Three steps to Para-
^.^^st. WW broad are you?— From £• lo

I^W. How long are you?— From N. to S-
^ Are you astray ?— No, X am uot astrav.
^' Where are you going ?-<- To the Nortn.
^ What to do ?— To look for my Brother.
** What U his name?— Sarsfield. What is
'* your number?— It is 5. What is your pass
^ word?— Eliphismatis. How do you stand
^ those times ?— -Upright as well as I can ; I
*' am afraid. Doa*t k^ afraid; the duke of
** York will save you : What do you carry ?— -
** The Bod of Aron at command. Who sent
'^you here?»Simon Peter. Your coat is
<" dirty ?— Is it high up ? Pretty high up.--If
^ vou be a friend-you will come and clean it.
** Where dkl the Uock crow when the world
** heard him ?— In France. What is vour
^«pifiioa of the weather ?— It b quite clear.
^ I think the ftded flower will bk>w agsia.'^

Mr. M'N^^Uy Lord, and Gentlemen
of the Junf . In times like these, after what
you have beard, considering myself, what I
am in heart and souL loving and reverue tha
constitution under which I live, I shall not
address you without expressing tbe abhor-
rence which I feel in my mind firom the
charge against the prisoners; and I cannot
have a doubt, that every man upou the jury,
equally abhors a crime, marked by the most
infamous cruelty that cau degrade the human
heart. A conspiracy to commit a crime can
have no palliation from the crime not having
been perpetrated, and therefore the impression
upon your mhid must be the same, as if tbe
murder were actually committed. But, gen-
tlemen, let me warn you against retainmj^
that impression in your mind, when youdeh-
berate upon tbe case of the.prisooers, because
it is your duty to wipe away the heioousness
of the ofieoce so as not to sufier itto influence
your minds beyond the investigation of tbe
evidence which has been adduMd. You are
not to form a sudden conclusion, beauise the
charge is atrocious. You are to consider this,
th&t if such an offence could have been taken
into consideration by tern men, it b equally
possible^ that imo men^ such as the witnesses^
could iorm a conspiracy to fabricate the
charge. They stand u& equal situation as to
past conduct. A paper b read— to prove
what? That tbe prisoners are Drfenders—
the witnesses acknowledge tkejf are Defen-
ders. It appears, that they were considered
to1)e perpetrators in all the enormiUes, until,
as they aJlege| they took an a^lum in the re-
giment of Artillery.

Gentlemen, I certaialy cannot bat aclnow-
ledge, that one fact«wom to l^y these men is
conoboreted — but what is that?— that they
were taken in tbe house of CarmichaeL But
it does not follow^ that Ihe^ were all. acting
toj^ther as oonsmntors, and only four or five
oTtbe prttoners havelieen identified by either
of the witnesses.

-Gentlemen, the credit of the witnesses is
with you, for this case depends entirely upon
the credit, which you may give them ; and

455] 36 G^R^E ill.

TtiOt ifiht D^flh/tagn-^

{450

wHeiryou cdfne to comMer tipoYi Uicir creflit,
though it does not a^^pear Hi&l they e«me al6 :
approvers— that they ^re *ptfP<*ieMcd first,
and came to save thetfisetves frohi prosecu-
tion, yet it appears, \\aX there 'i^ai a time,
when they themsel^s wouid have been guiltv
and were guiKy of thte very offences, Which
they imipote to others. Gentlemen, witnesses
>vill be produced on the part of wtnt of the
prisoners, to show that ^aiough the^ were in
Hie iiouse, yet that they «re innocent pcfrtons.

Jame$ Whiie sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Greene^

Do you recollect ibe SlMof MM&y Ias\P
—I do.

Were Voft hi the heme ef •Carthfchae?! In
the evening of that <flay ?*-J8f*rtighati and •Rei-
]y were in (ny company in a part of the room
at a distance (Vom ttie xnhers. 'Sc^ghan
lod^ in the house, fie >^as ^ti^ hottie,

' hhVmg' disagreed with Ms master, and wrote
a letier to iiis nothefr to that effect. We

' went to look for a vacant seat in the front
rooin, then went into ^«e back room; there
Were nine or ten men t*»ere, and tw6 artiltcry

. meti. We went to the fihr^ vacancy opposite

• to Ihem ; we had two glasses^-^Reily then came
in, and sat down and todc two "glasses of
■pundh. A gentleman came in, and gave the
Jirsttompany in eharge,imd no person was Let
out. We sat contented there, and who the
other persons were, I knew not.— But on the
eoming of the akierman he enquhred our
tianres, and lie appn^ended them as he got
their names, and when he had the large com-
pany appreh^ended, and €ln'michael, tne man
of the house, he then turned to Reily, and

• 'Aid, "you will come too, a very good name.*'
The only thing Retly had about him was 4
^rane7hote. He then a^^ed Soraghan his
wnWej " you will conie 'too,** said he.— With
that ihey marched mitofthe house, and no
more was said that 1 heard.

' Did either of the AYtifHeryMnen make any
declaration with regard to Iteily or Soraghan ?

• -^ spoke to the gemlenian apprehending
ihem, and said, '* I hoped there was nothing
us to them or their com^mny .** The AitRlety*
ina<i rose up and mid, *' no jierwn wtu eon-
ciemed,littt those who sat iwitli him in the
large cempaoy,"

Cross- exauBiDcd by the Prtne Strgautt.

Soraghan «id Reily lo<%edat CannichaelSf
—Yes.

WhatfiroughtyoutoCanaiehael^^-^I wa^
tip<yn my travels home, and tnet'the two — So-
raghan was at the door.

You met them accidexrtaHy ?^I fbund them
there.

Franck KwhI sworn.— £xa»ioed hy llr.

Greene

Do you recollect Vie Shit df January?— I
do, very well

You were at the ^oene cf Carmichael?^!
was.

TM you kiio# Retly and Soi^^Mn!?— I
iwver^aw them before thatni^it— they "hatlded
tne "a glass nf punch — they were not of the
company who tvrjre detected, btrt when theal-
dernian came in, be desired all to be sftoppetl.

Did you hear either of ^ Artillery-men
make any declaralion as to Reily or 8<Mrag-
han t — No, I did out hear.

A Juror. — ^What are you ?— I am a consta-
ble^ and went there that night.

Mt. Aidtmmn Alexander calM again.

Was inhere any reason, why Reily and Sf)-
raglian were separated? — They were in a 'se-
parate box with a woman.

Karl oT Ctonmefl.-— There is evidence for the
jury as to ten.

Gentlemen of the Jury. The prisonera
stand indicted fur that they on the Slst vf Ja-
nuary hist ^id conspire to kill and murder a
person of the name of Hanlon. To suppdtt
tbb prosecution TbomasSmith was produced ;
1 shall read over lus evidence without any
observation, because I shall leave it totally
to you. The case turns entirely upon the
credit you give tb^ witnesses.— -(Here lus
lordship stated all the evidence). A paper
was produced, manifestly treasonable, every
word of it, and it goes to show you, that they
were likely to assemble fbr the purpose -of
miirderinz a persrni, who was to prosecute
other Oerenders, being Defenders themselves.

GenUemen, here the prosecution was
rested, and Mr. M'Naliy ptit the case apon
fair greufid, whetiier the prisoners, or the
witnesses were the conspirators P It is a
main ^cpies^n for your consideration. If you
boUeve they bawe sworn firisely, and that this
was a plan of theirs— a scheme to bring tn-
nocent persons into criminatioa, yon mu^t
acquit them all. Hut if you believe the testi-
mony of these witnesse?, with the evidentHi of
the aldermen, and Gregg as to their identity,
yon will find them gjuifty. This is a misde-
meanor; I am glad it is, because if the crime
had been committed, they must havh been
tried for murder. They then poduccd Jatnes
White ; all that he swore was, that he wds
present at Carmichaers fcouee. He endea-
voHred to distinguish, so as to get obC BteXiy
and Soraghan, but the first witness said they
had ali decided to kill llanlon -alt particj-
|»ated m the intention.— This wHness said
these two were in a seat with him, xlista^t
from the c^er company- --the Artilta?rv-me.n
siAdtfcey were not of the tompanya't first,
bnt afterwards they included ttiBm.---Very
little nccnrs to me, upon this occasion, tO'Ss^
K) ymi. ft is fbr your cunsidcration. ff vou
befieve, that these people as^-ehibled vnthtl^c
<rtmlnal intent charged upon them-^th^t
they were brought together for thepurpdsjt pf
forming a scheme to destroy IlanTon, Vo;i
ought to find them all gtiilty. I€any line pf
^di^nctiun occurs to you. tvith regard y^
Reiiy «nd 8uhi^an,ybawi6 Aftdattt)rt!l1%V :
it does tttntfecutib me. I^ill)«ttVetlR^&S9

46^1 Andren tSldfunan and others Jbr a

%o you ; totfd If ycM have % r^asotMkbleiioiibt,
Dut such M i4)t tir fmicirul teet) may ttke up
on remote p^obatMKtied, but such fis tannot
Bfttiftfy yoor judgttareuts tipon yourttathft, then
yoM will acquit. If you have no suth doubt,
you will find theni guilty. I hafve not dilated
upon this case ; perhaps the horror of the of-
fence might lead me farther than I ought to '
go. You are rational men, and you will de- <
temiine according to your consciences, whe-
ther you believe these mfen guilty, or not.

The Jury retired for about ten fninuttii aod
te turned with a verdict finding James Connor ;
and James Dempsy, Not Guilty^but all the
other persous fianed ao the indictiaeat^*
tiuilty^

Tknnday^ March Srd^ 1706.

Bath the Grand Juries were called over.

The prUooers. found guilty upon the indict-
meol tor the conspiracy were brought up to
laceire judgment.

The Earl of ClonmeHy addressed the pri-
soners aod said ; I trust you will believe ine,
when I tell you, that I never left this Court
with more real concern, than I did the first
day yott w^re called up here. I saw, as indeed
at present, with sorrow and pain, tch decent
looking men, above want, with no appearance
of distress, with nothing to provoke them —
with every reason to hope that they were and
would be, and had been as useful members of
society, as any other ten men in the coromu-
Dtty. Look at them (said his lordship,, turning
to the grand juries), and see whether von do
not participate with me — they have the ap-
pearance cither of tradesmen, or farmers, or
of that class of citizens that might well have
supported themselves by honest means, carry-
ing; on an honest Hvelfhood and makingthem-
sdves as respectable as any men, or set of
men m the state (turning to the prisoners).-*-
You may think theu, with what painful dis-
tt^ess I heard the offence af^inst you, which
the jury believed, notwhhtondinjg every cir-
cirmstancft that might be urged m your fa-
-tour; because ten of you were tried together,
yonr number would be a circumstance to in-
duce a jury to lean In your favoin*, if they had
tiot been clear in the evidence agarost you.
You have just beard sentence of death pro-
nounced against a wretched soldier in your
jirestnce.* You, every one of you, owe to
Tour prosecutor. Smith, whom you conceive
to bB a subject crt" great detestation— You owe
lohim, that iht sime sentence ^hidh you
^\swt heahl prunt)imted upon the Midler, has
Hot been rep^t^d against every 6ne of you,
and that you are not the subject df that ialk-

•• **His lordship had a few trthiUtcs bfefofe
-pa^ed senteilte upon lHulherh, a private ih
the Aoneig^ til'dhsa, 'for murdbt.^ Orig.

Emiti ' .J -

Conspiracy. A. 0. 1796. ^ t^^

mods punishment wtifeh I bdVt bcfCM obligjed
to pfeiss upon that man. You hzte been chargjcd
upon the clearest evidence With touspirihg'to
faiurdter a fellow creature, who tiever gave
personal offence to any of you. Atid s)ee under
wiiat circumstances you appear- --and it is ile-
cessary you should know thehorrot of the 6f-
fence. This act from its ctmimiencement to
the perpetration of it contained no small space
of time, t know not what communion ybu
are 6f— four Sundays intervened upon whiich
you went loreli^ouswolrship, with this horfor
upon your minds, and the very day you fixed
upon to perpetrate the of!t;nce was Sunday,
as if you ^isre outraging against God Al-
mighty.

I ou have had time to mak^ yottt* defeUte.
I will state a few of the leading circtunstanccs
of the evidence and with the sanction that the
jury have given it by their verdict upon th^ir
oaths, vtrho were all respectable citizeAs.
The case against you was tliis: — ^Glennau had
a brother-in-law in theeaolofNaM, and he
was informed against with ten tr el^en oth^r
Defenders by ihe person you had conspired to
murder— his name was John Hanlon. Whfle
those people were in gaol, Glennan and l^is
wife got hold of Smith, who bad been a Dl?-
fender himself from 1795. That app^red
from these circumstances. He swore, that
in the presence of several he tendered nis ih-
forrmation three times at the Castle of Dublin,
the first time so earl)r as January ltP5, oOc
wh'ule year before this transaction. He wtis
there examined, and gave information against
several Defenders, wno had swum lo be triio
to the National Convention — to follow that
fugitive traitor Hamilton Rowan, and alsb to
follow Napper Tandy and two other persons-^
the sound of the name of one is respectable io '
my ear, sir Edward Bellow — the other, Cole,
I know nothing of. Sn^ith with' others wds
sworn to support Defenders. He was exami-
ned two or three times by the confidential
servants of governfnent from Januaiy 1795 to
April 1795. Now you all heard and saw whlit
passed in the Autumn of 1795. It has1)een
conveyed to the public through other lips^tliat
is the evidetice of Lawler,* between whom
and Smith it never was pretended there was
any knowledge. Hanlon gave information
against a set of people who had vowed ved-

feance against a respectable clergyman. Mi*.
I^alsh, and in order to take away the testi-
mony of Hanlon, one scheme of murder was
to follow the othc)", Glennan had undertaken
to lay hold of sSmilh, who at this time wa$ in
the artillery, to which he had fled, not think-
ing there was assistance to be had at the Castje
at that time. Glentian formed the plan so
early as January 1796> and considered Smitli
•as a proper person to seduce the unhappy
man itito their power — for that is one part of
their e2cccrable system, treason to be executed
by murder. The mode was this : Smith was

>* pi

rrr

*- ♦ISec thB precetfmg cis^s.

4fi0]

86 6E0R6BnL

Trials qfike Drftnden^

£460

to deliver fianloo into their handt, they were
to take him along the meadows, and put him
to death and throw his hody into the river, and
Kane said, ^ as soon as it is fixed, I will, on
the Friday after he able to march 18,000,
men into Dublin.*' Whether he lied or not,
or could 4o so or not, it is sworn he made the
declaration. The import of the oath taken
was to serve certain persons, who were named,
to recover their estates, sweep clean the Pro-
testants and leave none alive. Which of you
made use of this expression constitutes no
variation as to the argument — that was the
general purport of Defenders — it has been
sworn to by great numbers of people. The
impression I wish to make is, that this is not
an idle tale, but that there is exbting, and has
been for some dme, a horrid system of mur-
der and treason, the seeds of which were sown
by such men as Howan and Tandy, who have
fled from their country. I wish that masters
of families were more attentive to their child-
ren and their families in the early part of their
lives. I have endeavoured to save the youth
of this town. By two examples I have en*
deavoured to save the rest.

Masters should have some care that children
and apprentices be not brought to the gallows
in a hurry. Every master of a family should
\t accountable for his family, and not woSkt
them to resort to punch-houses— first lettins
them get together, then they are infected and
made authors of the worst offences. From
the 3rd of January down to the last day of the
month, when this horrid plot was preparing
aoainst Uanlon, it appears that Glennan was
the person to bring the boys about htm.
Smitn informed Lane, and by well concerted
conduct, and the spirit and vigilance of al-
derman Alexander, this horrid and infamous
scheme was prevented from execution, which
night have been perpetrated in half an hour
af^r.

One ^the Priaonen. — My lord, there were
five of us chandlers had nothing to do with
the business — we had come from Chapel.

Earl of CtonmelL — Five chandlers together
, on a Sunday evening in a punch-house?—
' You should have been in your own places.
You talk of a chapel ; that brings another
part of the case into my mind. Let it be re-
collected, that Hamilton Rowan vras or pro-
fessed to be a Protestant — that Jackson was a
Protestant clergyman, and therefore let not
an expression of mine be supposed to apply
to those of any persuasion. 1 am in too high
a situation to fear any man, or class of men.
I tliank God, I am in a situation which puts
me above politics. I have but one view — ^to
exterminate this evil from the countiy, if I
can.

What you have said, baa not suggested any
circumstance in your favour. But take it in
another point or. view. I will suppose the
persons 1 have named were professedly of
the Protestant religion.-<-What is doing in
France ?<-*Thera Roman Cttholiea are drown-

ing in huiidreds.^Even their own chrofma
are packed together and exterminated. 8a
that religion is made a pretence. ^ We may
begin with Protestants, but the next day we
beein upon another class," and so they
win proceed to a third, until thev destroy
each other. Let me go farther and suppose
they succeed. If the streets of the city
flowed with the blood of Protestants, tlial
would answer no purpose. When the Pro-
testants of this country were fewer and
weaker by thousands than they are now, they
were able to establish themselves, aiM! they
never can be borne down but by their own
timidity, and want of spirit. Would it benefit
the Roman Catholics P^Certainly not They
have been told so, and the oath is the cere-
mony which binds wickedhearls together, and
if one class of men were destroyed, anoUier
would succeed, and everv man having any
thing to lose would fall under the knife.
Suppose them to succeed in this, and
that these associated people were widied to
damnation, if they have anv sense of ?L
would it answer them, if they had destr(>yea
every Roman Catholic of property in the
country ?-*No. The country is a great one,
and worth fighting for, and if they destroyed
every man of proper^, the country would
be conquered again. Therefore it is a falla-
cious system.

God and nature have joined England and
Ireland together. It is impossible to se-
parate them, and if bands of ruffians started
uf> in every part, they could not holi the do-
minion of murder for a month. I have seen
with pain, that this phrenzy has got among
the people of Ireland, and if^it be a phremgr^
prisons are their safest mad- houses. What
was the situation uf Meath? — ^Rich almost
beyond any neighbouring county — ^the farmer
happy>c::=the peasantry, yeomen, and gentry
all delighted with their situatioii, because all
were mdependent. How is it altered?—
Whence is it that that unhappy county (laa
become a sort of slaughter- house ? — From the
practices of some wicked minded people;
who they are I know not;-*-God forgive
them. They will fall victims of the bw,
agunst whkh they are strugsling. While
the countries round are i^ermine through
the horrors of war and famine, Ireland eould
not sajL there was a creature unfed or unpro-
vided for—Why r— Because the bad are fed
by the good, and the South feeds the di»*
turbers of the North ; and if the country had
been left to the Defenders, and if it bad not
been for the industry of the South there
might have been one universal fiunine.—
What then are these distracted and unhappgr
people told P— But in truth I early saw and
spoke of it in acts of my du^ here and else-
where, that the mischief originated in nests
of clubs in the city of Dublin,— Dublin it the
mint for coinina treason and circulating it in
small parts, and making it current A num-
ber of yOuDg persons iriQi trades which aught

461] Aninm Ghman ani dhers/ar a Qnufnracjf. A. D. 1796.

[462

fsake them respectable, not tn wtnt, no ap-
pearance of it, are become the nio8t active
amenta. And here I must mention a circum-
atance— you must feel the weight of it. There
never was a time, when persona of your de-
scrtution had less reason to complain. Look
at the canals and various public works. Thou-
sands of the poor are employed, and supplied
with work even in the time of war. Within
these five or six years past, many persons
have looked to the state of the poor, and en-
deavoured to make them all comfortable and
easy, and yet this is the time in which this
phrenrjr haa seized such numbers. Is this an
idle taie ?— Is it not notorious, that cruel and
horrid murders hare been committed upon
witnesses, just at the eve of the commission ?
—Is it not part of the sjrstem spread through
the country to destroy witnesses?— Two crea-
tiiieS| because they were witnesses or sup-
posed to be witnesses, have been brutally
murdered in the dead of the night at the gate
of a man who deserves as well from this
oouDtiy, as any other man in it He who haa
employed so many of the poor to improve and
embellish the most improved place in that
part of the country where he resides. Few
people are willing to do as much as he did. I
nave known him to have two military eom-
ndssions. He quieted the South without a
ainjgle person mlling a sacrifice, and he
qoieled the West,ivith the thanks of that
country. Yet two persons were murdered
mt his gate, because they were witnessea*

Wh^ must be_ the situation of persons of
his description, if the country be made dis-
agreeable to them?— The land will be aban-
dooed by all the proprietors, and the tenantry
«ill be left to be worried by tribes of agents
and managers s— Their landlords will never

to them.

So that taking this sul^ect in every point of

view, it is the most wicked system of murder
and treason that ever vras heard of in any
country, that for some years past has dis--
graced mine own.

A very old author discoursing upon Irish-
men, says, ** where Irishmen are good, it is
impossible to find better, where they are iMid,
it is impossible to fiud worse /* I am afraid,
we have got to this alternative. Treacheiy
was never the character of Irishmen. Cou-
rage and intrepidity were their cbuacieristics.
Evenr creature is taught to fight but boldlj
and fairly. But it was not until this system,
founded upon the^French mode, the total want
of an principle, that we began to be dis-
graced*

I have eone thus far to show the conse-
quences of this wicked and bbck system by
which you have been seduced, brin^^ do-
struction upon yourselves, and eveiy tiling
dear to you. I now come to the sentence
which I am obliged to pronounce upon you.

I have recdved two or three petitiooa this
morning upon this subject. I am bound by
the verdict of the jury. It is a calamitous thing
to think, that decent persons like you can be
seduced. The witness swore that tea vreie
equally acquainted with the intended murder.
He acquitted three. But all the rest, he said,
were sycquainted with the design. I hope the
example of thia day will operate through tbe
city, and all parts of the kinadom. You must
have many rebtions. I wilfnot wound theni
by exposing you in tbe streets— to send
them nome with sorrow and ahame. For
their sakes as well as your own I will not
do it.

But vou must he punished 3 and therefore
each of you is to be imprisoned three years,
pay a fine of 50/., and give security for your
good behaviour for seven years, commencing
from tbe expiration of your imprisonment.

4^3' 86 G^QJUGRIH.

Triof qf^ BlMfiti ^Bm§^

[46*

6^18. Proceedings ou the Trial of the Bight Reveread Father in
GocJ^ Jqhn [ TFarm?} Loup Bishop of Bangor; Hugh
O^TEN*, D. p. John Roberts, and John Williams,
Clerks; and Thomas Jonks, Gentleman, for a Riot:

«

tried by a Special Jury, before tbe Honourable John
{I^tl^ Esq, ocie qf the Justices of the Court of Commoa
Pleas, at the Assize^^ holden at Shrewsbury on the 2€th
day of July : 36 Geproe III. a. b. 1796.*

\Vm Siog op f h« prosdcotioii o# dMnuel
Grindler, against

Tho rislu k^^reod John Lord Ibbhop of
Bangor. U^b Owm, elerk, D. D. John Ro-
horU, doek, ^oba WifHiaois, clerk, aad T1^-
nM6 Jonea gemleman.}

JUJBLT.

TkoKM Kinmersley, of Leighton^
Thoana Jelfe Powja, of Sme^hoott, •
John Mouktiia, of Ashton*haIJ.
George Appleby, of Shlffnali.
John fiiftbtoa, of KUsalL
Edbward Gatacce, of Gataere.
WUfian CltMMe, of Oflton.
Kdwerd Fembarton, of Wrookwardioe. '
jDhQiAiU,olPKe8.
Andrew Oorbett, of High-Hatton.
John Smitheman, of West Coppice.
• Oven Roberts, of Weoiy — esqra.

XhE Indiotskent coniisls o( several counts ;
9j^ States, tb^ Samuel Orindley, ^enUeman,
is depiUgr ngit^ of the conaistocial court of
the bishop of Bangor ; and being such, had of
right the occupation of a certain office adjoin-
ing to the cathedral church of Bangor, called
the Registrar's office :

That the defendants, intending to disturb
the said prosecutor in the execution of his
said office, and to trouble the peace of the
kins, on the eighth day of January 1796, un-
lawfully enterra the said office, and for the
space of one hour, against the will of the
said Samuel Grindley, stayed, and during the
said time made a disturbance therein,
and did assault, and evilly treat the said
Samuel Grindle^r, and did affirm, that the
said Samuel Grindley unlawfully assumed
the said office :

That the defendants did stir up ill-disposed
persons therein assembled, to expel the
said Samuel Grindley out of the said office :

That the said defendants did assemble to
disturb the peace of the king ; and a certain
room, callea the Registrar's office, did enter,
and disturbance then and there did make, and

** Takeft in short-hand by Joseph Gurney.

ufontbe said SaiiMiel Qikii)!^ did makeaA
asaaukt

Thai tbe defendsvM did unlawfully »v
semble In diaturb ttie peace of ^ Hinga vA
upon the said Sanwiel Grindley dkl majke an
assault.*

[This being a proceeding in the court of
King's-bench, the personal appearance of
t^e defendants was not i^ecessary J

Cmnmlf9ff the ProifCKlMHL-^Mr. 4<lain,

SNaw, ]ai9, Loid Chiof Commiasiorief of the
ury Court and a Ba^p of the Court of £s^
ohequer of ScojUaAd, and a member of \m ^»r
jes^*s most honourable Pii«y CouncilV Mr,
Sergeant Williams f Mi. Maiftleyy jjiftr. Ellis.

Solicitor, — Mr. Grindley the prosecutor.

Cwmeljor ti» Z)</i?m2aiai.—The Honour-
able Thomas Erekine [afterwards Lord Chan^
cellor Brskine]; Mr. Plumer [Hilerwards^
auocessively, Vice-Cbi«^ellor of England, aiid
Master of the Rolls] ; Mr. LeyceslM , Mi.
Milles.

&/ict7or.— Mr. Andree.

Mr. Ellis opened the pleadings.

Mr. Adam^X — May it please your Lordship,

Gentlemen of tlie Jury. — You have beara

from my learned friend who has opened the

- - ■ - — ... ■ I •

*Thc indictment was originally preferred in
the court of Great Sessions, in Wales, where
the offence was charged to have been com-
mitted, but for a more impartial hearins, was
removed into the court of King's-bench, and
sent down for trial in the next adjoining
county, before a special jury, at Shrewsbury,
where Mr. Adam and Mr. Erskine attended
on special retainers; the former as counsel for
the prosecution, and the latter for the bishop
and the other defendants.

f Mr. Sergeant Williams was prevented
from attending by indisposition.

{ Some inaccuracies in the former report of
this address to the jury have been obligingly
pointed out to me by my highlv respected
friend, tbe learned person who delivered it^
and they are here correct^ accoxdingly.

465]

and oihersfjbr a Riot.

A. D. 1796.

[466

pleadings to you, thalSaniiiel Oriodlc^ is th«
prosecutor^ and that he is deputy registrar uf
the diocese of Bangor. — ^You have heard,
likewise, that the defendants are, the bishop
of Bangor, three clergymen, and a gentleman
who is agent tu the bishop.

In the outset of this cause I have already
learned enough, from the manner in which my
learned friends have received the opening of
tbe^pleadinss, to show roe that they seem to
bave an inclination, as it were, to make that a
jest, which, I can assure you, is a matter of
extreme seriousness. — Gentlemen, I intro-
duce it to you with all the anxiety which be-
longs to a person who is unaccustomed to ad-
dress you.-*I introduce it with* the anxiety
which belongs to a person who is to maintain
a conflict with abilities that are seldom un-
successful. I shall open it to you, I do assure
you, in the pure spint of moderation and of
candour ; and, if I might say so, in a question
of this sort, in the pure spirit of the true prin-
ciples of Christianity ; that is, of wishing that
all mankind should do unto othen as they wish
to see done unto themselves.

Gentlemen, I wish to call your attention
to it seriously, and will just take the liberty
of stating, why you are called upon to judse
in this cause. — ^The question to be tried, end
not happen within your ordinary jurisdiction :
it was not in this county that the offence,
which is complained of, took place : but an
application has been made to remove it here ;
and it is possible that such an application
might produce some prejudice in your minds,
as if there had been something ra the con-
duct of the party, for whom I have the ho-
nour to appear, which has made it improper
to permit the question to be tried where it
arose. The application to remove the cause
firom Wales to the nearest English county,
was founded upon an affidavit of the other
party, which I nave not seen, and was granted
Dy lord chief justice Kenyon, who undoubtedly
exercised his discretion wisely and justly, as
he does upon all occasions. He thought, that,
under the circumstances stated by those con-
cerned for the bishop of Bangor, and upon the
affidavit made by those who are prosecuted
(without an;^ opposition or interference of
any sort or kind whatever by the person who
appears here as the prosecutor), it was fit to re-
move it, — ^When he did so, I know he removed
it to a tribunal of uprightness, and honour,-^-
I know he removed it to a situation where, I
am confident, intelligence and integrity will
alike prevail ; and I am by no means afraid
of the mere circumstance of its being re-
moved, having any influence upon minds like
yours.

Gentlemen, there may have arisen preju-
dices in this, as there do arise prejudices in
many causes. Undoubtedly, this is not the
first time that this matter has been the sub-
ject of conversation and discourse ; probably
It is not the first time, that even you, who are
Impanelled to try the cause, may have beard

VOL. XXVI,

of it. It is my duty to my client, and to tho
public likewise, if there should have been any
such conversation about this prosecution, to
remove all those prejudices, to remove all
the impressions that may have been re-
ceived, not only from your minds, were it
possible you could have received them, but
from all those that stand around. I say it is^
important to mv client, and it is important to
the cause of puolic justice, that I should en-
deavour to remove them. .

Gentlemen, I beg leave to statC^to you, in
the temperate spirit which I have professed,
that this is not a question, in which the ge-
neral religious establishment of the country
is at all involved — it is a question, I can as-
sure you, which is confined to the individuals
who appear upon this record. It reaches no
farther than their conduct, on the particular
occasion. It is a question which cannot, I
am sure, have the least effect to the prejudice
of that doctrine which the christian religion
inculcates, or to the prejudice of that rank
and situation in the state, (so important to the
well-being of society), which the principal
defendant holds. This prosecution does not
press on doctrines or on principles which
tend, not only to our happiness hereafter, but
to the good government of the world in which
we now live. I pledge myself, then^ that,
when you come to hear this case, you will find
that the facts which I shall prove are confined
singly and solely to the parties named in this
indictment.

There is another circumstance to which I
could wish to call your attention, before I en-
ter into the merits of the case— namely, that
although a church dignitary stands in the
firont of those indicted, that is no reason what^
ever why this indictment should not have been
preferred ; for if the facts which I have t6
state to vou, and which I shall aflerwards
prove— if the principles of law which, under
the direction of the learned judge, I shall hav^
the honoin* to lay down to you, are correct,
you will find that nublic justice must be satis-
fied by a verdict or guilty, notwithstanding the
rank and situation of the first individual who
is indicted.

It is a painful thine to me, not only on ac-
count of nis rank ana his situation, as a bi*
shop of the church and as a peer of parlia-
ment, to address you upon a subject of this
sort; but it is more so when I consider,
that, in the intercourse of mj professional life,
I have had frequent occasion to see that per-
son discharging duties in another place, in a
judicial and legislative capacity: 1 have often
had the honour, and I will say too the satis-
fiiction, to address him in that station. Gen-
tlemen, I can assure you that I speak with no
personal feelings against the bishop ; they are
all naturally on the other side. But what is
more, I can assure you that my instnictions
are, to conduct the cause in a pure spirit of
tegiper and moderation^ snch asl have already
described to you. ' W

467]

36 GEORGE III.

Trial of the bishop of Bangor

[468

. This, gentleineDy is not the only time when
dignitaries of the church have heen indicted,
and found guilty. You have but to look back
to the bead-roll of the State Trials, and you
will find many instances of the sort. You
have but to reflect a few years back^ when a
person, upon an indictment removed in the
same manner, though not a bishop yet a dig-
nitary in the church, was brought into this
court, for reasons similar to those which bring
you now here to try this indictment. Those
who heard my learned friend* upon that oc^
casion, or who have read the history of that
period, cannot forget the uninterrupted stream
of splendid eloquence and of powerful talent,
which has been rolling on, with increasing
force, from that period to the present mo-
ment, and which, then almost in its infancy,
was exerted in a question similar to that m
which I have now the honour to address you.
This shows you that there was, within our
own memory, in this very place, a prosecu-
tion of a church dignitary for a misdemeanor,
as there is upon the present occasion.

I will state plainly to you, why this ques-
tion is tried, and why you are called to deli-
ver a verdict upon it. It is, in the first place,
upon a principle of public justice, in order that
the justice olthe country may be satisfied. —
The prosecution is likewise proceeded in, on
another principle, which I am sure I am war-
ranted by the law of the land to state as a
sound one; it is founded in an honest, fair,
justifiable attempt, upon the part of this pro-
secutor, to vindicate his own character through
the medium of this prosecution. When I as-
sert that to you, I state a legitimate ground
of prosecution, and one that is consistent with
the laws of the country ; for it is in the power
of any individual to use the name of His Ma-
jesty for the purposes of public Justice ; aye,
and for the purpose of vmdicating his own
character and reputation. It is done every
day in the case of libel, and may equally be
done in the case of assault, or riot.

The situation of this prosecutor was, and is,
that of a person who gained to himself an
honest livelihood, by industry in his profes-
sion, and in the difierent situations which he
held in the part of the countrv where this of-
fence was committed. lie /ound himself at
once in the eye of that public where he lives,
io the circle of that community and society to
which he belongs (if he did not take some
method of bringing this matter forward to the

fublic observation of the countrv,. and of
ringing these defendants forward to receive
the public Justice of the country), in the risk
of being, m all probability, deprived of the
honest earnings of his industry, and of the si-
tuations which he held for the benefit of him-
self, and the support of his family.— These
are the principles upon which this prosecution

* Mr. Erskine, as counsel for the Dean of

StAiaph. SeeVom,p.847.ofthisCollec-
tioo, '

is brought forward ; and ther are jyrincfples
which do not involve any thing or a vindic-
tive spirit; they are principles upon which
every honest man dfliily acts ; they are princi-
ples upon which every honest roan may le-
^lly act. Who could have blamed Mr.
Grindley if he had brought an action of da-
mages against the bishop, for the injury he
has suffered ? What is the situation it) which
he stands here — not bringing an action for
damages, indeed, but preferring an indict-
ment? I will venture to say, that, under the
circumstances of this offence, and agreeably
to the matter charged in this indktmtnt, a
prosecution leaves the defendants m^re am-
ple means, and a better mode of defending
themselves, than if an action had been brought,
and they had been put to plead a justification
to that action. These are the points to which
I wish to call your attention, in order that
your minds may come coolly, deliberateljr,
and without prejudice, to the trial of this
cause.

Gentlemen, the indictment, as you have
heard, states, that the parties upon this record
were guilty of a riot, by entering into, and do-
ing certain acts in the office which belonged
to the prosecutor, as deputy registrar of the
diocese of Bangor. It states notHing but a
riot. There is no count in this indictment
singly for a common assault, although it is the
common mode, in drawing indictments of this
sort, to conclude with the charge of a com-
mon assault, with a view of securing a ver-
dict, in case the facts should not come up to
the proof ot a riot, t wish to call your atten-
tion particularly to this, because it shows,
there was no spirit to catch these parties, for
conduct, which, if it does not amount to a
riot, is not the subject of which this prosecu-
tor means to complain.

It is necessary for me (and I shall do it very
shortly indeed, before I enter into the state of
fi&cts which I must lay before you) to explain
the law upon the subject of riot. There are
various offences which people commit, congre-
gated together, which receive different deno-
minations in law. from the simple offence of
an affray, up to that of a riot, which it may be
well for you to know, in order that you may
be able to apply the evidence when you come
to hear it. The case of an affray, is a matter
which arises accidentally, without any preme-
ditation or intent — ^The next in order, is an
unlawful assembly ; that offence consists in
persons assembling together, to du some act
respecting private property (not concerning
the affairs of the public), and separating with-
out doing any act whatever. There is another
case, commonly denominated a rout, which b,
advancing towards the act, without arriving
at it. The highest in order, is a riot; in which
there must be these ingredients : in the first
place, there must be three ormore persons en-
gaged itk it; in the next place, there must be
an mtent wad purpose in the parties to commit
a riot; and, in the third place, U is esl^ential

4S92

and others, Jbr a Sioi*

A. D. 1796.

C47(X

that it sfuwild have for its object aoioe mat*
t«r of private coocern. When you come to
Kmt the evidence, you will always bear this
dennition io your mind ; which, I am satis&ed
my learoed irieod will not contradict, aod I
am equally satisfied my lord will support me
10, wneo his lordship comes to address you.

I pledge myself, then, to prove, thiat the
bishop of Bangor, and the other defendants
upon this record, were guilty of that which I
liave last described — ^that there were three or
iQore of them— that they committed a riot, in
a matter respecting private property, and that
t^y had an original intent and purpose in the
act which they did. With regard to the in-
tent and purpose, you unU always observe
this— that, intent and purpose may either
arise from the facts and circumstances that
exist at the time of the transaction, which, by
infefence, establish a necessaiy presumption
of an ori2inal intent; or, it ma)r be made stiil
more palpable to you, by showing a line and
tissue of conduct which necessaniy involves
that intent and purpose, and, therefore, ren*
ders presumption unnecessary, by giving you
dear, demonstrative, decided proof, arising
from the acts and transactions of the parties,
establishing a premeditated design, intent,
axid |)iiniose, in tiie acts which they did. You
will find that this last observation will apply,
most maleriallv and forcibly, to the evioence
I am about to lay before 2^ou, and the circum-
stances I am about to recite.

I profess, ^ntlemen, as^in and again, that
I have no object in view, out making you un-
dentaod this case ; and if, in the course of my
address to you, I either elevate my voice, or
give into a manner of action that is contrary
to the utmost moderation, I trust you will at-
tribute it to habit, and not to intention. — I
have no wish, but coolly, deliberately, and
calmly, to make you masters of the facts, the
circumstances, and principles, upon which
this important cause must be decided.

Gentlemen, I have already stated to you,
thai the prosecutor of this cause was deputy
registrar of the consistorial court of the dio-
cese of Bangor. — It is essentially necessary
that I should make you acquainted with the
nature of that office; and not only that you
ahould become acquainted with the nature of
the offices of registrar and deputy registrar,
generally, but tnat you should likewise be
made acquainted with the particular eircttm-
Mancet and local tUuat'wn of the prosecutor
and his office.

The deputy registrar is appointed by the
frin^pal resiatFar. The general nature of
the omce of registrar is, that he has the cus-
tody of aU the archives and muniments that
telaie to the spiritual court of the diocese;
thst is, he is to rejpster all the acts of a juri-
-dical nature; aod fie isy besides ihat^ the re-
gutiar of all Ihe wiUs and testaments of the
persons who die withia the diocese.— So that,
you ebaerye» il is an office of great impor-
tance, and exlendittg to the ialciest aod pro-

perty of a vast portion of the community ;
that it is an office, where the safe custody of
the different archives and muniments is of
the utmost conseauence. — Certainly, accord*
ine to the law of tne land — according io de-
cided cases, to which, if it is necessary, I can
refer his lordship, it is competent to appoint
a minor to the situation of registrar; ancl, ac-
cordingly, the present bishop of Bangor, upon
the resignation of the former principal regis-
trar, did appoint a nephew of his^ a minor, to
be principal registrar.— As it is competent to
the bishop to appoint a minor to be principal
registrar, so it is equally competent that that
mmor should, by some mode, appoint a de-

The reason why a minor can, in this case,
deviate from the general rule of law, and do
an act appointing a deputy, is, besause it fol«
lows, from necessity, that the business of the
office of registrar nmtH be discharged. If the
minor could not appoint, of course the duties
of the office could not be discharged, and
therefore, ex neccuUate ret, from the neces-
sity of the case, the minor is at liberty to ap-
point a deputy. But the power of the minor
goes no farther— there the law stops. The
general rule of law is, that a minor can do no
act— that he has no will, because he is not
supposed to have understanding to act for
himself. The exception, in this particular
case, is, that the minor does act for tho
purpose of appointing his deputy ; but the ne-
cessity goes no farther. But according to a
very recent decision, as mijght well be supposed
from the nature of the thing itself, the rule of
law is, that this registrar cannot remove his
deputy ; as was found in this very case, on an
application to the Court of Kiog's-bench.
Though this mav be tedious, it is an import*
ant part of this business to know that an ap-
plication was made to the Court of King's-
bench for a mandamus, calling upon the pre-
sent prosecutof) Mr. Qrindley, to deliver over
to a j)erson, of^the name of Roberts, all the
muniments within his power, and to deliver
up to him likewise the keys of his office, and
thereby give him possession of the place where
the business is conducted, and where the mu-
niments are preserved.— The result of that
application, for the order of the court to com-
pel this to be done, was a denial by the court ;
and I have authority to say, from those who
heard it, that the ground upon which it was
denied was this : lord Kenyon was of opinion,
that it was essentially necessary to apply to
the court of Chancery, to appoint a proper
guardian for the minor, that there might be
sufficient authority to appoint another deputy
registrar in the stead ol Mr. Grindl^; but
that he, being in possession of this office, and
Mr. Roberts not showing a right to the pos-
session of the office, it was impossible for the
Court of King's-bench to grant the order ap-
plied for.

1 have then, I conceive, established clearl^r,
iathe&st place, that Mr, Grindfa^ wasiu

471] 36 GEORGE III.

posseBsioa of the office ; and, in the next place,
that there was no legal power to remove him.
— Consequently, although, from necessity,
the minor may appoint m the first instance,
yet, if the office of deputy registrar is pro-
perly discharged, that necessity not existing
for the removal, the deputy registrar must re-
main until the principal arrives at the years
of majoritv ; or until he has such a guardian
appointed by the Court of Chancery, as is ca-
pable of actiAg in such a subject matter.

There is another material circumstance re-
specting the law upon this subject— namely,
that where a registrar is appointed by the
bishop, and a defnit^r appointed by the re-
gistrar, and the principal registrar is a person
not in a situation to act, there is no power and
authority, on the part of the bishop, to remove
the deputy registrar. The bishop, by law,
has no power or authority whatever to remove
the registrar or deputy registrar, except in the
followmg manner : If the registrar, or his
deputy, does any act or acts which are, in
tiieir nature, contrary to law; if they do not
act consistently with the duties of their office,
then, in that case, undoubtedly, the bishop
may suspend, but his suspension is confined
to " a year or more ;" and it has been decided,
that the words, " or more," do not extend in-
definitely to any period, but must be confined
to a reasonable period subsequent to the year.
Gentlemen, I beg you will bear this position
of law in your mind, because you will find,
throughout the whole of this cause, that the
bishop has had no fault whatever to find with
Mr. Gnndley, in the discharge of the duties
of his office; for he has never thought him
amenable to his jurisdiction for the purposes
oi suspension ; that he must have conceived,
therefore, that in the discharge of the duties
of his office, he has acted fike an honest,
laithful guardian of his public trust. If he
had not done so, would not this bishop, who,
as I shall prove hereafter, attempted first by
art, and afterwards by force, to remove him
from that situation, would he not have made
use of his sus^pending power ? Would he not,
near the period of the minor registrar comin<v
of age— wliich would have been in less than a
year from these transactions — would he not,
I say, have suspended him '*for a year or
more,*' in order that the trust might not have
teen discharged improperly? by which means,
the minor, when he arrived at that a<re of
Xwenty-one, when he would have the free ex-
erase of hisown will, might, according to law,
*ave exercised the power of amotion over his
deputy at his pleasure, without assigning any
cause whatever for the removal?

It ismaterial, in the discussion of this cause,
and most material to your understanding the
«vidence,.that you should know the particular
•situation of the office ; I mean the focal fihkH
*ioji of the place in which the muniments an6
^■ecords are kept. It is, as I understand,
.budt^adroining to and upon the cathedral
<cJw«Jipi:Ban^r; there if a flight Df stepe

Trial of the Bishop of Bangor

[472

risins to it, and you go through a poith, on
whicn^ there is an outer door. — ^Having got
within the porch, there is an inner door opens
to the register-office ; the office is directly op-

Kosite to the bishop's palace ; there is nothing
ut a court yard between them ; and it is so
near, that it is said every voice may be heard
from the one place to the other; of that, how-
ever, I am by no means certain, but it certainly
is within sight of the bishop's palace, adjoining
to, and built upon, the cathedral.

I have stated the duties of this office ; I
have shown you that they are grave and se-
rious duties : I have stated the responsibilities
of this office ; I have shown that they are grave
and serious responsibilities : I have stat^ the
nature of the muniments kept in this ofBce,
and described the place in which they are
kept : and I contend, I think without the ha-
zard of contradiction by mv learned friends,
that the person who was thus appointed de-
puty registrar, was irremovable, except by
the mode of suspension by the bishop m the
manner I have mentioned. He was not re*
movable by the minor, but through the me-
dium of a guardian, which guardian must be
appointed by the court of chancery. — The de-
puty registrar, thus invested with this office,
so charged with its duties and responsibilities,
had as good a right and tide to possess that of-
fice— to possess the house or place which I have
described — to maintain it — to take it again if it
were taken from him, and to defend himself in
it, as an^v Englishman has to defend his house,
emphatically denominated his castle. — ^It is
impossible to compare it more accurately. All
the circumstances that belons to the sanc-
tuary of a house, belong to the sanctuary of
this office. The sanctuary of our house is for
our repose, quiet, and securiw ; it is, chat we
may protect our families. The sanc^ary of
the official house is not that the family of an
individual may be protected, but is for the
protection of the interests of an exten»ve
community, it is in this case, that all wills
devising personal estates, that all the records
in the oihce of a legal and a judicial nature,
that all the interests of a large and important
diocese, may be protected. Then, all the
arguments lor a man's maintaining and de*
fending the possession of his house, apply in-
finitely stronger to an office chargea with such
responsibilities. — It is impossible that he can
secure, it is impossible that he can mamtain
that, which is essential for him to justify his
conduct towards the public^ without main-
taining possession or the building, where
these things are preserved ; and every person
who attempts to trespass upon it, is a tres-
passer in the eye of the law ; every p^son
3vho makes a riot in it, is amenable to tbt
justice of his country*

I have described' the situation of this offi-
<:ial house; it is built adjoininr to the eatbe-
'drel ; the wall of it runs into Mie wall of the
-cathedral. — I have described the nature of tlie
^office: it is a spiritual office*— The great

47S]

nnd o^erstjbr a Rioi.

Ronum orator giving the definition of a house
says, ** Quid enim sanctiusy quid omni reli-
^ne munitios, quam domus uniuscujusque
lavis ?" What can be more holy ? What can
be more protected by every principle of reli-
gion, than a house } — ^This is more holy ; this
ou^btto be more protected ; this is a spiritual
Ofiice; a spiritual office carried on in a build «
ing annexed, in local situation, to the cathe-
dral church. Thus characterized by duty and
annexed by situation, this gentleman, Mr.
Grindley, was bound, for his own sake, for
thesakeof the public, with whose interests
he was intrusteci — for the sake of the com-
munity of the diocese to which he belonged
— by the sacred situation of the place of office,
to possess, and protect bis possession in il,
that the muniments and the archives might
be preserved.

i am sorry to have detained you so long in
the preliminary pari of this case; 1 hope
however, I have not wandered, but have con-
fined myself accurately to the question before
jou. 1 thmk I have 'done no more than laid
that ground, which is necessaiy for your un-
derstanding the facts: and 1 now come to
state to you, nrecisely and accurately, what
the nature of those facts is.

I told you, originally, that I aim only at
distinctness. If I have that quality, I have
c^ery thing I can wish^ In order to be dis-
tinct, and m order to show you with what
mind and intent this riot was committed, I
anxiously intreat your attention to the com-
mencement of the connexion between Mr.
Grindley and the bishop of Bangor.

Early in the year I79t, Mr. Grindley was
appointed agent for the bishop of Bangor. In
the month of February of that year, the bishop
appointed his nephew, a minor, to the situa-
tion of registrar of the consistorial court of the
diocese. In the month of March 1792, Mr.
Grindley was appointed deputy registrar. He
conlinued to act in the situation ot deputy re-
gistrar, down to the year 1794, when, for the
first time, he saw the minor, who confirmed
the appointment, and who treated Itim as his
depnw registrar. The bargain was, that Mr.
Grinaley was to pay his principal seventy
founds a year. — He discharged the regular
payments. — He continued to act in his office,
without any offience to the bishop : and that
he had committed no offence in his office, is
clear, otherwise he, the bishop, would ccr-
lainly have exercised his power of suspension.
He conlinued, I say, to act in the discharge of
the duties of his office, down to the autumn
of 1795. Here then begins the history which
^ves origin to this prosecution.
• The approach of a general election led the
bishop of fiangor to think, that he might per-
•haps« be serviceable to some of his friends;
and he thought those immediately under him
were likely to be influenced by him. — He ap-
plied to Afr. Grindley, for his interest in the
county of Caernarvon. Uis application did not
meet with the reception, or with the answer,

A. D. 1796. [474

he expected. Mr. Grindley thought, as I
hope every Englishman thinks, that he had a
ri^ht to the free exercise of his franchise, and
of his influence ; but although he thought so,
I can assure you that he behaved with great
temper and moderation.— Mr. Grindley now
found, that his connexion with the bishop
became a connexion that was not so comforta-
ble, if they were not to agree in their election
interests ; he thought it right, therefore, to
resign the office of agent to the bishop ; and
he accordingly resigned his place of agent in
the month of January. — At the time he did
so, he signified expressly, that, on the SSnd of
Februar^r, he would resign the office of de*
puty registrar. — Now, could anv conduct be
more moderate? — You may, perhaps ask why
he did not resign tne office or deputy re^strar
at the time he resigned the situation of
agent? The reason he assigned was this, and
it is a valid and substantial reason — that his
year of appointment as registrar ended upon
the 92nd of February 1796 ; that, by retaimn?
the office till that time, he should be eotbled
to make up his accounts, to settle all • his bu-
siness, and then he would quietljr take his de-
parture from it. — ^Could any thing be more
moderate, could any thing more be reason-
ably wished for by the bishop ? ^ If this regis-
trar had become obnoxious to him, because he
did not obey him in matters with which the
bishop, I must say, ought to have had no in-
terference, either as a oishop or as a lord of
parliament ; if he wished to «t rid of Mr.
Grindley, might he not have had that patience
which ought peculiarly to belong to the cle-
rical character of those who appear as defend-
ants upon this indictment? Might he not
have had patience for but a little month, till
the deputy registrar voluntarily resigned his
office ? There is something in this conduct of
the bishop, not to be easily accounted for
and which can only be explained by the influ-
ence of the holy function on the human cha-
racter. There is a profound and witty re-
mark made by a great philosopher respecting
the clergy. It is said, " that having found,
what Archimedes only wanted, another world
on which to fix their engine, they move this
world at their pleasure.*' — ^That sayine may
go far to expound this conduct. In all spiri-
tual matters, it is a wise, a just, a true maxim,
calculated to explain the principles upon
which the clergy justly and beneficially for
society, possess that influence over mankind,
which ought to belong to their character and
situation in all spiritual affairs— but when
they travel from spiritual into temporal con-
cerns— when they quit the paths on which as
pastors they should only tr^ad, and look only
to the concerns of this world— when they in-
terfere in politics or in elections, that charac-
ter, which directs their influence in the clerical
function, unfortunately follows them into
their temporal concerns. If they are disap-
pointed, they cannot brook it. — They have
bean taught to regard mankind as >per9oii»

4753

SG GEORGE III.

Trial of the Bishop of Bangor

[476

wfaqm they are tg govern at their plf^uure —
they are iucapabie of &n)oolliing the matter
over,' as men accustomed to be thwarted in
Che ordinary concerns of life ; and their spiri-
tual character uniformly follows them mto
temporal concerns, if they are imprudent
enough to mix in them. This is vouched by
the history of the world, in all ages : it is il-
lustrated most particularly by the history of
this country. W ho ever heard of Sherlock or
Lowth interfering in such matters ? No !
They were enabled in their function to move
this world at their pleasure, because their
lives were spiritual and holv. Who has not
heard that Woisey and Jjouq were of a differ-
ent character and description? The E^o et
Rex meut of Woisey, and the violence of
Laud aninst the privileges of the people of
England, are equally to he collected from
that witty, wise and just maxim to which I
have alluded. Such is the situation of the
persons concerned. — Gentlemen, it does not
signify whether the scene is in the great
world, or in the county of Caernarvon : v/he-
ther it is transacted in the palace of White-
hall, or in tlie church-yard of Bangor ; — the
same causes will always produce the s-ame ef-
fects ; and I cannot a^ccount for the bishop not
having accepted of this moderate, of this at-
tentive, of this happy proposition of resigna-
tion by the deputy r^istrar, but because he
had deviated from his ordinary course : because
from spiritual he had turned aside into tem-
poral concerns ; because he had forgotten for
a time the concerns of that pure and humble
religion, of which he is an eminent pastor^
and had been drawn aside by the peculiar in-
terests of friendship, by the strong ties of con-
nexion, or by somethins else, in order to act
in the manner which I nave described to you.
In fact the resignation has not been ac-
cepted at all ; and the transactions, which 1
am about to relate, will show the reasons why
it has not been made, and will prove, that it
was not possible for the deputy registrar to
make it with safety.

Mr. Grindley found the bishop had be-
come hostile to him; he found, he was no
looser safe in resigning it into hands, that
could not legally accept the resignation ; he
found, he could npt have that confidence
which would have taken place, if it had been
left to his own freedom and choice ; and that,
after he had resigned into the hands qf a mi-
nor, he would, in point of law, have retained
all the responsibilities of the office, without
being, in tact, in the office, to discbarge the
duties:— Therefore it is, he has not resigned
the office. But the transaction which I am
«bout to state to you, and I am now come to
the real question in the cause (though I hum-
bly think, that jdothing I have said is irrele-
vant)— the transaction I am about to state to
you, will unfold the whole.

Between the fourth and the eightli of Ja-
nuary 17 i^, which you see was a mopth pro-
v^lQus to the lem oi the proposed lesignatiOD;

these transactions took place, — First of alli
the bbhop, in the absence of Mr. Griadley,
the deputy registrar, sent for the seals of
office; and he obtained one seal. I think the
other seal Mr. Grindley's clerk had not in his
possession, and it was not delivered. — ^This
was intimated to Mr. Grindley; and Mr.
Grindlev, imagining that the bishop, having
obtained one seal, misht possibly attempt to
obtain the keys; he,Deing at that time in
Anglesey, wrote to his clerk to beware not to
give the bishop the key of the office if he ask-
ed for it. The bishop did ask for it ; and was
refused. — ^Upon the 7th of January Mr. Grind-
ley returnea, and found that his office bad
been broken into. — He ascertained, as I shall

Erove, from the bishop's own mouth, that the
ishop had given directions to break open the
window of the office, to take the locks off the
door, and put on other locks.— 'In this situa^
tion, Mr. Grindley found himself^ respecting
an office, for the duties of which he was le-
gally req;>onsible ; for be is. both in law and la
tact, deputy registrar, and has been so from
the year 1798, down to the present time, with
out any attempt to cast a slur on his charac-
ter in the discharge of hb duties.

Gentlemen, I cpme now to the principal
facts; and Iran assure you I will act in the
spirit whidi I professed at the outset. I wish
to state every thing candidly to you ; I have
nothing to liold bi^k. I do not mean to say
that, in every minute particular, it is possible
to justify the transactions for moderation and
for pr^dence. Offensive acts may dispel mo-
deration, and may ruffle the temper, and yet I
think, when you examine the transactions of
Mr. Grindley, you will see, under all the cir«
cumstances, that they generally were neither
immoderate nor violent. — Mr. Grindley's of«
fer of resignation had been scoffed at, and re-
jected.— He had been treated in such a way as
to make it natural to suppose that he would
be exposed as a culprit, m the discharge of
his duty, to the whole community to which
that duty appertains. He found, that it was
essentially necessary for him to know in what
state the muniments and archives were, of
which he alone had a right to the possession.
He found the means of entrance debarred,
and, therefore, determined to get admission U>
the office : and, having ^ot admission, he de-
termined to maintain himself in the posses-
sion of it, as he had a full right to do.

In the morning of the 8th of January, Mr.
Grindley weKt to the office, with the means
of getting admittance into it. You will ob-
serve, that the first attempt to get possession
of the office had been on tne part of the bishop
— ^You will always recollect, that the bishop
has no earthly nght to the possession of the
muniments of that office, as long as the reei»*
trar properly discharges the duty of the office.
-^He has no right to keep the registrar out of
his office, but the registrar has a right to keep
all oiankind out of it, except those^ who come
upon business^ and except the bishop when he

477]

and oiherSfJbr a Riot*

A. D. 1796.

[478

comes in the discharge of his duty a% • Buhop
vf Bangor, — Mr. Grindley imagitied, from the
violence that bad taken place before, that is
to say, from the violent breaking into the
office orieinally, and Irom the offer of compro-
mise on nis part, and even of resignation,
being wholly rejected, he imagined, and it
vras natmtd so to imadne, that force would
be opposed to force, when be once eot posses-
sion of his office ; and therefore, undouDtedly,
Mr. Grindley went provided, so as to secure
himself against the possibility of that force
depriving him of his office. — Gentlemen, I
insist Uiat while he was in possession of his
office, he had a right so to do. All this will
be proved — I sav it will be proved ; because I
know Mr. Grinaley, who is the first witness,
is a person beyond the suspicion of triffine
with his oath.— The oath is, ^ that he shall
speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth.'^^-It has been uniformly ex-
pounded, that a person, who does not speak
the whole truth in a court of justice, is as cri*
tninal as he who speaks a direct falsehood.
— I feel myself bound in duty and id con-
science, as an advocate, to state to you the
whole truth ; and Mr. Grindley is a man of
tliatconscience,that he will speak the whole
truth in the manner in which the thing hap-
pened. It will then be for you to judge, un-
der all the circumstances ; and I think that
whatever opinion you ma^ form with regard^lo
Mr. Grindle^'s rashness m his manner of get-
ting possession of the office, and his deter-
mination to maintain possession of it, you will
be convinced, that the bishop and those in-
dicted, were in fact guilty of a riot, for endea-
vouring to get possession of it, and comine
and interrupting bim in the manner I shaU
describe and prove.

Mr. Grindley went with pistols in his
pocket; but it will be proved, ihae pistoU
mere unloaded, — Now, lean assure mv friends
(whatever gestures they may make) that I am
not in the least afraid of this fact. — I say, his
eoing with unloaded pistols, proves, that he
had, in regard to getting possession of the of-
fice, no intent of offence whatever. — He took
powder and shot, with which, when he had
got possession, he loaded his pistols — which
proves that he was determined, being in
peaceable possession of his office, to maintain
that possession ; and I contend, that the de-
fnity registrar of the diocese, under the cir-
cumstances I state, had a rieht so to do. — I
say, that every argument which applies to
the case of a roan's house, and to his right to
defend it as his castle, applies to this case-
Mr. Grindley, after he had opened the outer
door in the porch, in order to prevent any
riot, and for the purpose of intimidation,
threatened one of the persons who came from
the bishop's house to interrupt him, with an
taload^ pistol ; for it will be proved, that
the pistols were loaded at a nmetfaent time.
A^et this first attempt to disturb him, there
was a considerable interval; and during this

interval Mr. Grindley got into the inner dooh
Mr. Grindley being thus in the office, the
bishop and various of his servants arrived.-^
The bishop holloed with a voice so loud (as
will be proved to you) that Mr. Grindley dkl
not know it ; his passion was so vehement,
that it was absolutely impossible to distinauish
his voice.— The moment Mr. Grindle)r knew
it was the bishop, he said he had no objection
to the bbhop's being let in, and he desired
his servants quietly and peaceably to retire lo
a farther comer of the room. — Mr. Grindl^
then came forward, and said, that whatever
business was to be done, he was ready to do
it ; that he considered himself as the legal of-
ficer^ and be was then in the quiet possessioD
of his office ; that, with regard to his lordships
he was perfectly willing he should come into
the office, but be begged that his lordship's
boisterous and tumultuous conduct mi^ht
cease. — I really wish, rattier that the wit-
nesses should describe what passed after-
wards, than that I should.— But instead of
that tumultuous conduct teasing, the bishop
approached first to Mr. Grindley, aflerwaids to
his servants, with threatening (gestures, and
with threatening words, laying his hands upon
them : and he was assisted by tho four other
persons Indicted, who afterwards came into
the office, whose actions and words were pre-
cisely of the same kind and description.

Gentlemen, one of the grounds of riot
which you have to tr^, is this, that here was
a person, legally entitled to the possession of
his office, illegally forced from that office ; he
had taken possession of this office, and re-
mained in the quiet possession of it. — Now^
whether he did so in a manner that was pei^
fectly calm, and such as an unconcerned spec-
tator may approve^ I do not know ; but I am
addressing myself to persons who have human
passions, who know what human nature is ;
and I am sure, in an outrage of this sort, conw
mitted after a voluntary oner of resignation,
such as I have stated; after a conduct so
peaceable and quiet, that they will feel even
a wonn, if trod Upon, would have turned
again. — ^Mr. Grindley had sot quietly into the.
possession of his office, ana then, after a lapse
of time, this office was again attacked in the
riotous, tumultuous, and extraordinary man-
ner which the witnesses will slate, but which
I forbear detiuling, because, in the first places
it is unnecessary Tor your understanding the
cause, and in the next place, it is painful' for
me to state it This aisturbance went on a
considerable time, and at last it ended only
by the arrival of persons, whose sex and cha-
racter I have too great a respect for, to inti^
dttce into the cause, mere than just to lay,
that by the intervention of Mrs. Warren, and
two ladies, the bishop ^vas at last quieted, and
withdrawn from the riot. There the busi-
ness ended. Gentlemen, this is the ease whick
yen have to try ; and I think I ean venture to
sat, that If the facts «re proved In the manner
I have described, and I take upon me to say,

II

47S1

36 GEORGE III.

Tiial of the BUh^ qf Bangor

[480

I have stated them roost corrcMitly, it is impos-
sible for you ooi tafind a verdict for the pro-
secutor.

Gentlemen, it would be in vain, and an
absurd thins in me, to detain you with' any
particular address to yourselves. I have the
tionour of knowing hardly an^ of you per-
sonally, although among the jury there are
some gentlemen whom I have had an op-
portunity of seeing in another scene in life. I
enow your characters, and I know that how-
ever you may feel yourselves bound to protect
the ministers of our church, though I think
tbia prosecution can have no effect upon any
but the particular churchmen engag«a in this
transaction, you will yet guard yourselves
against deviating from those principles ac-
cording to which yon are bound to act, and
that you will find according to the evidence.

Gentlemen, there is no principle implanted
in the human mind,- stronger or more natural
than the sympathy which we feel for the si-
tuation of persons of high rank and condition :
it is this sentiment which binds society toge-
ther ; and is most admirably infused into our
nature,- for the purposes of good government,
and the well-being of civil order. But what-
ever his rank mav be, that rank can never
stand between a defexraant and the proof of
the fact, with a jury of Englishmen. They
know tlieirduty too well, to let feelings of
sympathy affect tbeur minds -in defiance of
proof.

Consider what is the peculiar situation of
these defendants; reflect, that they are set
apart by the laws of the land, and the regula-
tions of the Christian religion, for the purpose
of preaching the doctrines of Christ. Our law
has been so peculiarly cautious with respect
to their character, that even when it empowers
the civil magistrate to quell a riot by calling
to his assistance eveiy other member of the
community, it excepts, with women and child-
ren, the clergy of the land : I have broueht
before you persons of that description, who,
instead of claiming the exemption, have them-
selves been guilty of the riot

[The witnesses were examined apart, at the
request of Mr. Erskine.]

EVIDSMCE FOa THB PaOSECDTION.

Mr. Samud Orindley sworn. — Examined by

Mr. ManUy,

Were you at any time, and when, appointed
agent to the bishop of Bangor ? — I was.
• When?— In the month of February, 1792.
. Were you, at any time afler that, appointed
|o any other office ? — About the same time.

Mr. £ri^'iie.-*-That must be proved by the
i^ppointment itself!

Mr. Aianl^, — Did you, in point of fact,
fll any other office than that ot aeent, under
tl^e bishop of Bansor P— Yes, I did.

What was that f— Not under the bishop ;
under Mr. Guoning I held the office of de-
puty registrRr.

When did yon begin to hold that office ?-<-
About the Uth or 16th of February, 1798. .

Did you continue to discharge the duties of
that oroce ?— I continued to discharge the du-
ties of that office till the 82ud of February
last.

Where did you discharge that office ? — At
the Registrar's office, adjomiog to the cathe-
dral church at Bangor, in the county of Caer-
narvon.

You said you were appointed deputy to Mr.
Gunnine?

Mr. rlumer. — He did not say that,

Mr. Manley, — You acted in the office ?—
Yes.

Did you ever see Mr. Gunning afler that ?
—Yes, the latter end of September, or the be-
ginning of October, 1794.

Mr. P/umer.— Which Mr. Gunning f—The
registrar.

Mr. Maalc^.— Had you any conversation
with him ?

Mr. Erskine* — Any conversation with him !

Mr. Manley, — Did you pay any money to
the registrar f — Not to himself.

Did you pay any upon his account?— I paid
to the bishop of Bangor, on the registrar's ac-
count

Mr. Erskine.-^l am sorry to trouble your
lordship— I do not know that it is very mate-
rial that I should do, what I am about to do ;
but we ought to adhere to the rules of evi-
dence

Mr. Mauley. ^l will put it out of all ques-
tion. In whose name was the office of regis-
trar held ?

Mr. Justice Heath, — Ask him who was m
possession of the office of rejgistrar?

Witness. — Mr .Gunnine, a minor.

Mr. Manlei/, — You paicTseventy pounds a
year to the bishop, on account of Mr. Gun-
ning the youneer f — Yes.

Did the bishop know you paid him that
sum on account of Mr. Gunning the younger }
—Yes.

Mr. Erf Aine.— Mr. Manlcy ought to recol-
lect there are other defendants upon this re-
cord, besides the bishop of Bangor — if ^ov
would prove that this man was in possession
of the office, be it so, I have no objection to
that ; but you cannot go on farther than that,
to prove that he had the legal appointment
01 registrar.

Mr. J^an/ey.— You said the bishop made
the bar^in between you and Mr. Gunning,
respecUng the rcgistrarship ?— He did.

What was the bargain between you and
the bishop ?— >The registrar before Mr. Gun*
ning, it was thought, ^ve a hundred pounds
a year : I mean was paid a hundred pounds a
year.

What were you to pay?— Seventy pounds
a year to the registrar.

In consequence of that bargain, did you
enter upon vour.office as deputy t — Certainty.

Did you ml that office up to the 82d of Fe«
bruary last ?*-I did.

«J3

imd ctherttftr a Rba.

A. D. 1796.

L48e

• Bid you cootiiMie to pay thai salbry, seven*
ty {KNinds a year, from the time of your be«
eomkig deputy ?-*I did, till the 9^of Febru*
ary last, and then I offered to pay that to any
person who could receive it.

Did you afterwards see Mr. Gunning, the
registrar? — ^Yes.

Uadyott any conrersatton with him?

Mr. jBrs/cine.^-CoBTersation with him !—
why do not ^ou call him ?

Mr. Manley, — Waa it in the bishop's pre-
sence?— Yes.

When was it ?-->I think in the latter end of
September 1794, Or the beginning of October.

Relate what passed between you and Mr.
Ounning in the presence of the bishop P — ^The
lushop OTOught Mr. Gunning to me, and told
jBe he was his nephew, the principal regis-
iiar, and introduced him to me as the princi-
pal registrar, and iniooduced me to Mr. Gun-
oing as his deputy. Of course, 1 had some
conversation with the registrar ; he was then
(Mahout the age of seventeen ; I asiced him if
I gave satisfaction; he said, I pleased his
ancle, the bishop, that the bi^op was satis-
fied, and of course he was perfectly satisfied.

Was there%a0y complaint of your not doing
the duties of your office ai any time ?— None,
that ever I knew of.

Had you any complaint firom the bishop, or
any person? — ^Noboo^r laid that to my charge.
— ^I said, I paid what is called the forming of
the office, to the biishop ; he said, I know you
do— I hope the office answers your expecta-
tion.

In the year 1795, had you any conversation
with the bishop respectmg the approaching
election ?

Mr. Ertkine. — Can this possibly have any
relation to the question f I object to it as to-
.tally irrelevant.

Mr. JMraai^.—- I am asking the witness to
.state what passed between the bishop and
bim, relative to the election, to show the mo-
tive upon which the bishop aAerwards acted.

Mr. Enkin€. — Your msisting upon the
question, shows the motive of the prosecution
pietty evidently. We are here upon an in-
. dictment for a riot, which is charged to have
been committed upon the 8Ui of January, in
. the year 1706. For the purpose of doine that,
which my learned firiend most honourably and
candidly disavows, for the purpose of tiirow-
iog dirt at 4iie bishop, we are to begin about
something that passed relative to the election.

Mr. Justice Hea^, — ^All this b matter of
aggsavation ; and matter of aggravation ought
tobe laid before the Court of Ring's-bench —
.lei us see whether imnroper force has been
used in the course of tnis business, so as to
constitute a riot— ^this is for the oonsideration
of the Court, who is to pronounce sentence,
in case of a oonviction.

Mr. Jisai/ay.— Be so good as to descaibe
the situation of tlie place in which^youtXMl-

to the cathedral church at Bansor, under the
chapter house, opposite the bishop's palace.

How fiir distant from the palace ? — About
150 yards distant— there is a flight of steps
by which you ascend to the outer dcor of the
office — then you go into a passage, which they
commonly call the hall.

Did you employ your clerks in that office ?
— ^Always.

Who had the keys of that, office ?--Gene-
rally the clerk that was there. . «

I our clerk ? — Yes.

Did you pay that clerk ? — Always ; I had a
resident clerk' there, and used to send other
clerks to his assistance — I superintended the
business myself.

You had a resident clerk there, to whom
you entrusted the key ? — ^Yes.

Had you made any offer, or did any conver*
satiou pass between you and the bishop, touch-
in^the resignation of your office of agent?
—I had.

Mr. £ftA;iii€.— This is totally irrelevant.

Mr. Justice Heatk.-^The question we have
to try here, is the degree of force and violence.

Witneu, — It was my intention to resign it
on the 33d of February.

Mr. Maniey. — If we are to go by the strict
rule, I take it to be the clearest principle of
law that can possibly be stated in a court of
justice, that I hyave a right, as counsel for a
prosecutor, if I insist upon it, to state every
fact that is relevant to the cause, though per-
haps, for the sake of the convenience of the
Court, it has been usual to state matter of ag-
gravation only by affidavit : but if I insist
upon it, I take it to be a clear, settled princi-
ple of law, that I have a right to state it ; but
I do admit that it has been the usual prac-
tice, and of late years, within the reign of the
last chief justice of England, it has baen usual
to state that by affidavit; but I believe the
principle was never denied, that the par-
ty had a right, if he chose so to do, to have
every fact in evidence before the Court that
is relevant to the cause ; but I do not insist
upon it here. I merely mean now to ask one
or two simple questions touching the resigna-
tion of this office, which appear to me mate-
rial to this cause.

Mr. Enkine.-^l have no right, undoubtedly
to call upon the prosecutor's counsel to state
the course of their projected examination —
my office is confined to taking an objection to
any question, that I humbly think is illegal.
I agree with Mr. Manley, and do not wish to
bind him down by the practice of this or that
chief justice ; I ask no other limitation to him
than the law of the land prescribes at all
times. I admit, that it is open to Mr. Man-
ley, without asking your lordship's leave.—
That your lordship*s jurisdiction does not ex-
tend to estopping him from asking questions
to any faei that is relevant to the cause.
Then, what is the cause?— The cause is not,

dtscAed the buaineae m the riaigistfar's office P i ; whether this man had legal possession oi the
-^The registrar's ofioeia •^gydiiiBartwiwiig I'Oflfce, or whether be by force had possession
VOL. XXVI, • I 9 1

48SJ

36 GEORGE HI.

Trial of the Bisltop of Bangor

[484

ofthftofSce^whether thelushop of Bangor
came into this office upon a legal or an illesil
vroject. — The question is not, quo enimo the
bishop came into this office, but whether he
came, attended with those circumstances, and
did those acts charged upon this record, and
^ich oonstitate a riot ? That is the matter
I came to defend. ' I do not know, except
hearing from my learned friend, nor ever
troubled myself to enquire, whether this man
had any other colJatend character than of
agent to the bishop.

Mr; Mantey. — I abandoned the agency
long ago,

Mr. Enkine. — ^Js there any question be^
fore the Court ?

Mr. ManUy.-^Th^ question which I was
about to ask the witness was, whether he ever
made any offer to resign the office of deputy
registrar —Did you ever make an offer to the
bishop, to resign tlie offico of deputy regis-
trar ? — I said I would resign on the 2«d of Febru-
ary last. — When was it you told the bishop
that you should tlien resign ?

Mr. Ertkine* — Was it not in writing that
you made that offer to the bishop ?— I am not
clear whether it was in writing, or verbally.—
I resigned my agency in writing, but 1 am
not positive as to the other,

Mr. Erskine.'^'l am positive, for I have got
the Jetler.

Mr. Manley, — ^Vou did, in point of fact,
tell him you meant to resign on the 23nd of
February ?— Undoubtedly.

Where were you on the 4th of January
last ^^ At lord Newburgh's.

While you were there, did any thing hap-
pen ? — I was sent for by lord Newburgh upon
some private business. I desired my servant
to bring my letters after me that came by that
day's post.

In consequence of letters received there,
did you return to Bangor?— No, I was not at
Bangor till the 7th.

When you returned there on the 7th, had
any thin^ happened at the office i"— Yes ; the
office had been broke into.

Do you happen to know, from conversa-
tion with the bishop afterwards, who had
broke the office ?— Yes, and from others.

Who were the persons who broke it?

Mr. ErskiTie, — Only tell us what you heard
from the bishop ?

Mr. Manley. — Do you know from the bi-
shOD by whose orders the office had been
broken open ?— The bishop told me, in the

Eresence of my clerk, that it was broke open
y his orders. He said, it was done by
his servants, by his directions ; and one of
his servants concerned in the breaking of it
told me.

Did you observe, from the outward appear-
ance, how it had been broke into?— There
was a window; the leads had been taken
put, and the glass had been taken down, and
it Speared to me, that the persons had got
through the iron bars; and nreah locka were

put upon the doors. Did you communicate
to the bishop that fresh locks had been put
upon the doors? — I asked my lord if he knew
any thing of it; he said it was done by his di«
rections.

What steps did you take in consequence of
that? — I was exceedingly surprised*— I did
not know vfhal to do for some time. At last
I went to Bangor Ferry— I staid there the
night— -it was late — I had papers of great
value — ^I had stamps to the value of two or
three hundred pounds left in the office ; and
I knew I was answerable for all the archives,
wills, and other papers, thai were there ; and
I thought I ought to be restored to the pos-
session of it as soon as possible. On the
foUowing morning, accompanied by my ser-
vants, we set off about nine from ^ngor
Ferry— we arrived at the office about ten — I
had two clerks with me, and three servants.

When you arrived at the office, were
there any other persons there? — No other
persons that I took notice of— none by my
desire.

Describe what you did P— I gave directions
to force the doors open.

Was the door forced open P— The outer
door was forced open.

Did you enter into the- office afler yon had
forced the door open ?— I walked out at the
door afWr I had* forced that, and ordered mj
people to walk in and open the inner'door — £
walked out while they were doing it
Did they open the inner door? — ^Yes.
Did the oishop, or any of the othcf
defendants, make their appearance there? —
When I walked out of the office, I saw Mr.
Thomas Jones, one of the defendants — be
came out of the dcan^s garden, to the best of
my recollection, and he walked into the
office ; into what we call the hall. — I did not
expect any thing of the kind — he placed his
back against the inner door, and endeavoured
to prevent our entry .-^I asked Mr. Jones,
what he meant by that— he at last ^d he
meant to prevent our entrance— I said, go
about your business, Mr. Jones, you have do
business here — he said he had, it was his
office— upon which I told mv people. — I en-
deavoured, first of all, to take him and put
him out of the door ; but he struggled ind
wrestled with me a long time. — fdid take
him to the outer door, but could not do more
—he put his hands agaunst the door- way, and
I could not get him any farther — he was m
sight of the bishop's palace, and the ser-
vants, and called out to them to come to his
assistance.

Use the expression he used. He called oat,
here ! come here ! or something to that efieet
— Wh^n he called out, John Kasbrook, the
bishop's house-steward, came out, and *aid,
follow me! — and they all run towards the
office; bttt Ra«brook was much before the
servants.

Who were they that ran ?->-Tb€ bishop's
UYeiy-se^uitSy and othera^

485]

nnd others fjbr a RioU

A. D. V19&.

[486

How nttinr might thete be ?**Four, five, six,
•or scTcn of them, I cannot be perticalar ; I
was confused when I saw them all run so—
when I saw them run, I said to William Ro-
berts, one of my servants, put Mr. Jones out,
lake him ouU— the man put his arms round
him ; uid 1 perceived that Rasbrook and the
bishops servants were running' up— I stood
upon the steps ; Rasbrook came very near me
nmning; I had in my pocket an empty
pistol ; I took this out, and told him if he ad-
vanced another step^ that I would shoot him.

It was an empty pistol ?— Yes.

You are positive of that?~I am.

Relate what followed? — Rasbrook turned
round, and ran away, and the bishop's ser-
vants stopped all of a sodden.

What did you do upon that ? — By this time
Mf* Jones was removed out of the office by
my servant— We all went into the office, and
shut the outer door, and fastened it, as well
as we could, because it had been forced opeu,
and it was not to be locked ; we went into the
inner office, and there we were very peaceable,
and meant to have been so.
. How long did you continue there before
yoa were iniemipted ? — About a quarter of an
hour.

What happened afterwards to interrupt
your tranquil Itty ? — I was at the upper end of
the office ; one of my servants called, and
said, there vras a loud knocking at the door,
and somebody wished to come in-^I went
there, and heard a noise at the door.

Did you know whose voice it was f— I did
oot.

W^ it a loud voice? — ^YeSf it was— I did
not know the voice; upon this I said, if
there was any body that meant to enter into
my office by force, that they would do it at
their peril.

Did you say thaV loud enough to be heard
on the outside of the door ? — Yes— There were
several persons there; I loaded one pistol
with powder and shot, not with ball, and re-
peated that I was armed with pistols, and that
if any body came into the office by force, they
should do it at their peril, and. take the conse-
quence, for that I would defend my office, as
I thought I had a right to do, and that I would
shoot uie first person that entered. I heard
a voice from without, ^ Will you shoot th^
bishop V* — then I knew it was the bishop ; I
knew the bishop was there — *' Open the door
to the bishop,'' the same voice sidd — I said,
*< Yes, my lord, immediately, provided your
lordship enters peaceably." i

Did you speak that out aloud, so that the
bishop mielit have heard it ?*-Yes, I am sure
he must nave heard it — by this time I had
loaded my pistol : I put it into my pocket: I
walked to' the chair I aenerally sit on at my
desk when I transact business; I sat down,
^.d desired the door might be opened ; the
bishop came into the office to mc in a very
great rage.
.. Did any pther persons come in with him ?

—There were some others that came, but I
cannot particularly tell who— the bishop came
in such a rage, that I took more particular notice
of his lordship than any body else ; he came in
and said,'* Fine work!'' he said," You shall not
stay here, I will turn youout immediately !*' — I
said, <' My lord, I slmll certainly behave with
due respect to your lordship, but I will not
leave the office." — the bishop was in a great
passion ; he took hold of me ; then he went
from me to my husbandman,William Roberts;
he was in the office : then he iVent and laid
hold ofanother of my servants, David Roberts,
and attempted to pull him out of the office.
The bishop then returned again to William Ro-
berts, and took him by the collar, and pushed
him towanls the door ; he walked and nm
about, and was in a violent passion ; he had a
handkerchief in his hand, wiping; his face, and
came up to me with his hands so [describin^^
it, clinchinj; his hands, and holoing them
up before his breast] and said, he would turn
me out.

Was it in the common way in which the
bishop holds his hands, or was he in a great
passion at the time?— He was in a passion —
It is not usual, I suppose, for a bishop to hold
clinched hands — ana he called to his servants,
and 3aid, come and take them out — there was
one of them, Griffiths, the helper in the
stable ; he said in Welch to the other persons,
shall we venture them, shall we lay hold of

them?

When the bishop ordered his servants to
come in, and tui'n you out, did you give any
orders to your own servants ? — I told them not
to eo out, that it was my office.

When the bishop first same into the room,
did you give any orders to your servants ? —
I told tnem to retire to a spot near the
window, and to be peaceable, and to be
cool : << I have a right to defend this office ;
it is my office ; be cool ; molest no one."

And did they retire to that spot, and keep
cool and peaceable P-*They did — I begged of
the bishop to be peaceable, and leave me in
possession of my pffice, and not disturb me in
It ; I told him it was my castle, and I had a
right, by law, to defend myself in it; or to
that effisct.

When the bishop called his servants to
come in, and take you out, what followed ? —
He said, send to a magistrate ; send to Mr.
Kyffin — At one time the bishop called to his
servants; one of them stepped foi^rard and
called out, let us lay hold of them! shall we
venture themP let us turn them out! let us
drive them out!

Was that aAer he had received the orders
from the bishop ? — It was the bishop called
frequently to them. — I told the men the dan-
ger of it; that I was determined to defend
myself; that it was my office ; it was a place
of great consequence to me ; that I had many
things of value there ; that I would defend it
by the means .God and the law had put
into my power — I used those words-'Mr.

487]

36 GEORGE III.

Roberts^ the arcbdeicon, tkM other defeDdanty
he came therei and he was also ia a gieat
rage.

How soon did he come afUr the bishop had
given those orders ? — ^I cannot take upon me
to say whether it was immediately before or
immediately afterwards ; be was in a very
great rage, and made use of very abusive lan-
guage to me, and said, if nobody else would
turn me out, he would— with his fist clinched
—and the bishop said I had pistols with me :
Pistols ! said he — if you have pistols, shoot
me, do not shoot the bishop ; here, I present
myself to you.

Where was he standing at that time?---
Veiy near me in the office ; he repeated it
over and over in the most outrageous manner;
he desired me to shoot him, but not the bishop
— -I said, he would appear very violent in the
bishop's presence ; he said, come out with
me, come on, said he, if you dare ; and he
said, he would retire with me, pointing
through the window to the church-yard ; he
was not afraid of me in any place. I replied
to him, ttiat I had then something else to at-
tend to.

When you told him you had something
else to attend to, did any thing fartlier pass?
—He continued there a long time — some-
times very outrageous ; at other times very
abusive; at other times he said nothing.
The defendant Hugh Owen came also there.
When did he come up? — I cannot be posi-
tive.

He is a clergyman ? — ^Yes.
Where did he confe to? — He came into the
office also ; he was talking very loud, and
makinc a noise there ; he was very insulting
— I told them repeatedly, that I was very
sorry for their conduct ; that if any of them
bad any business, I was there ready to trans-
act it; otherwise, I begged they would go
about their business.

What did Mr. Owen do ? — ^He was very in-
sulting, and making a noise. — There was a
Mr. John Williams also, another defendant,
who behaved in a very riotous manner.
Is he a clergyman also ? — ^Yes.
llelate what he did? — He was less noisy
than the rest of them— I asked him what
business he had there ? — he did not make me
any reply — I told him to go'about his business,
that he had no business to stay there ; but he
staid there lone after the rest went, a^nst
my will — I tola him to £0 about his business
repeatedly ; he told me he came there at the
request of the bishop, and would not go — I
farther told him it was a great shame for Che
bishop, and the rest of them, to come there
in that riotous manner.

Mr.. £r</»ne.-^Tbis was after tho bishop
was gone? — Yes.

Mr. if«nldy.— Was Thomas Jones there?
—He was there.

How did he conduct himself ?— He jdned
with them ; he was very noisy, a^d insulting
«Ad abusive to Be.

Trial qfihe Buhop tf Bangor [488

<

Did you desire hitn to leave the office ?~I
desired them all ; but I spoke to WiHiaras in >
particular to leave the office, because he re*
mained there after the rest were gone.

How did the matter end afterwards ? —Mr.
Ryffin came there afterwards*

The magbtrate ? — Yes ; and I saW the sp-
pearance of a constable — The bishop imme-
diately said to him, Mr. Kyffin, do your duty.

Where was the bishop all that time? — ^All
the time in the office; they were there about
an hour.

When did the bishop say that?— The bisbep
said that, I think, as soon as he saw him ;
Upon this, Mr. Ryffin advanced to the place
where I was, and said, in Grod*s name, Mr.'
Grindley, what is the cause of all tins?— I re*
plied, that I really could not tell what was tiie
cause of it ; that the bishop and his chaplain,
followed by several others, had come into the
office in the manner he saw them, in that
riotous manner. I said, if they bad any bu-
siness to transact, I was ready to do it; but
if they liad not, I thought it would be right
for him to do his duty, and turn them all Out^
Mr. Kyffin did not do any thing at all; he was
a very peaceable man, sind I wish all the rest
had been the same. Then Mrs. Warren canie«
attended by two other ladies; she begged of
the bishop to go away ; he said, he certainly
would not ; she said, do pray ; and laid hold
of the sleeve of his coat with one or both of
her hands; and he resisted her, and said he
would not go. There were two other ladies^
of the name of Marriott; they were in tears;
thev begged, for God*s sake, he would go;
and they and others prevailed upon bim, and
at last got him to gOi.

What length of time were they, upon tho
whole, in the office ? — As oear as I can recol-
lect, about an hour.

Mr. Samuel Grindley cross-examined by Mr.

i,r$kine.

You have not told us when it was that the
bishop of Bangorfirst desired you to leJinquisli
your.q^e. — How long was it before this
transaction? — I told him that I should relin-
qubh it

I am not asking you what vou told the bi-
shop, but what requisition the oiahop made of
you ? — ^He had made none of me.

He did not desire you to give up your of-
fice?— ^No.

At no time, neither by letter, nor by word
of mouth? — He wrote me a letter.

You have had notice to produce that letter ?
•—Not that letter.

You have had notice to produce all letters?
—I beg your pardon ; the bishop wrote to me
to desire I would send him the Key of the of-
fice, if that was a requisition.

The icey bad been formerly kept by one of
your clerksy who resided at Bangor? — ^Yes, ia
my absence.

Where was it kept when you were present ?
— -Somoihaes by me^somoiioieB by a resident
clerk.

4WJ

mtd Qth€r9fjar m Itiot.

A.D. 1796.

[490

What M hw name f--*TlioiiMU Dodd; he I
kept the key generally, and tbe other clerks
I used to flend to bb asmstanct occasionally
keptiL

or course, when the bishop had occasbn to
go into your office he might send for that key ?
— When be had occasion, I suppose he aid
go; I never saw him gotheve oot of office
hqurs.

Do yon recollect desiring your clerk not to
deliver the key if the bis£>p sent for it?—
No.

How came your counsel to state that in
vour absence?— I desired that my clerk would
tie upon his guard, for the bishop had taken
away the seals out of tbe offioe, which sur-
prised me very much. I desired my clerk
would be careftiL lest he should get into pos-
sessran of the office ; and, to take care or the
key.

Then you desired your clerk to be upon his
guard, and if the bishop shoukl want the key,
not to deliver it to him f — ^The bishop had, in
a clandestine way, sent to my resident elerk,
and ^t the seals.

Did you, aye or no (I am not inquiring
your motives), desire your clerk to be upon his
guard, to be careful, that neither the bishop,
nor any other person, should get into posses-
sion of the office f — I was so surprised when I
heard tbe bishop had sent for the seals, that
I thought it necessary to caution my clerk, as
I bad Uiings of great value in the office.

I am not asking yoiu* motive ; by possession
do not you mean that the bishop should not
have from the clerk the key, to get penonal
access into your office in your absence P — ^I
told him to be cautious, lest tbe bishop should

fet possession of the office; but I never refused
im admittance.

Was your clerk, by your permission or di-
rection, to let the bishop have the key in your
absence, if he wagted itf-«I gave no other
directions but those.

Upon your oath, did you not direct your
clerk to take care tlmt the bishop did not gain
entrance into the office, in your absence ? —
Lest he should get possession of the office.

You desired your clerk to be upon his guard
that tbe bishop might not have the key to
enter into tbe office, lest he should take pos-
session of it f — Lest he should get possession
of it.

Then you desired him not to let the bishop
have tbe key, lest be should get possession of
it ? — ^I told him to be upon his guard, that no
one ousted him of the possession. I will re-
late the very directions, word for word.

Mind, I ask you upon your oath, whether
you did direct your derk to refuse the key to
the bishop, if he wanted to go into the office
in your absence P— I did not

Then you wei^ willing to let the bishop into
the office, in your absence? — He is here
[meaoing^he clerk], let him answer for him-
self, I said this to the clerk, that I was in-
ibfnied tha bishop had got possesswn t»f tbe

greaf seal{ that he had applied for both; I
desired him to be careful of the office, lest the'
bishop should endeavour to get possesskm of
that silso.

Do you mean by tlmt, that he was to be
careful, and that if the bishop wanted to go'
into the office, he should accompany him, to
see that he did not take tbe other seal, or that
be should not have admission into the office
in your absence f — ^I did not give him any such
directions: all I directed him was this, to be
careful lest the bishop should get possession
of the office also.

Did you give, him any directions concern-
ing tbe key 1-4. think it was in writing that I
sent the directions.

Will you swear vou never directed him any
thing concerning the key ? — I think I did not-
mention it : but the key must be included :
I gave general directions.

Thank you, Mr. Grindley, that is what I
wanted. The bishop had taken off the lock
from this door, and had another key made for-
it, and the bishop told you that this was done
by his directions P — ^Undoubtedly.

Did he not tell you at the same time that
the key was there, if you wanted it to take
any papers out of the office f — He did not.

Nor wrote you to that efiectP— No.

Nor communicated it in any way ? — I can-
not speak to that, but another person will.'
A message was sent to my clerk trom the bi-
shop, in the evening after the riot, by Mr«
Roberts.

That is not an answer to my question.
Previous to the time of your coming into the
office by force, as I mean to contend you did,
had you any declaration from the bishop, that
the key was at the cathedral, or the palace,
and that you might have it ? — ^Positively not.

You had no reason to think that you could
get • possession in any other way, than the-
way vou had recourse to ?— He told me that I
^ould not

Then you sent for your three servants ;- are
they your domestic servants ? — ^They are my
domestic servants.

What are their names? — Two hired ser-
vants, and the other is my blacksmith.
' You call your blacksmith your domestic
servant? — I said I had two hired domestics,
and the other was my blacksmith.

Who were tbe others ? — ^Two clerks.

You desired them to brine pistols with
them, and powder and shot, aid not you P — '
Yes.

I have an account of it here, I knew a good
deal of this some time ago ; you shall hear of
that by*aiid-by ; you desired them to get pis-
tols, and powder and shot, and come to you f
—Yes.

That you migbt get possession of the office P
— I never meant to make use of pistols to set
into possession ; I meant to defend myself if
I got into possession, and if any body shouM'
attempt to oust me, to defend myself in the*
possession.

491]

96 GEORGE III.

Trud ofik€ Bishop of Bangor

[492

Then jou did bring pistbls, and directed
powder i^nd fthot iihould oe brought, and they
were accordingly brought to you?— ^Tbey were
not.

• Where did you first receive the pistols ? — ^At
Bangor Ferry.

From whom did you receive them ? — From
Mr. Jackson ; and then I put them into my
pocket unloaded.

When Mr. Jones saw tliat you had entered
into the office, vou desired tlie blacksmith, no
doubt, to break the lock?— I desired them
generally.

AAer you had got access, Mr. Jones put
llis back against the inner door of the office ?
—Yes.

For the purpose of preventing your opening
that also? -So it appeared.
: Upon which you directed these persons that
were with you to pull him out ; you endea-
voured first to put nim out yourself? — ^I did,
when I saw the bishop's servants running up
to the office.

Upon your oath, was it not before ; for you
said the bishop's servants ran up in conse-
quence of Rasbrook calling out ? — Yes.
: Was it not before liasbrook called out? —
lie called out for assistance, when I was in the
act of so doing.

. Did he call out for any other assistance till
you endeavoured to puU'him out; and did not
the bishop's servants come in consequence of
hiscalhnz out for assistance f — Yes; I. en-
deavoured to get him out, he struggled and
wrestled with roe; if the other doorhad been
fairly open, I think I could have put him
out.

But be called out loud ?— Yes.

And in consequence of that, Rasbrook was
tHe first min that came up? — Ye^, he came
up very near the steps: I told liira, if he
advanced, he must take the consequences.
. Do you mean to swear, that is what you
said to him ? upon your oath, did you not
present the pistol to him, and tell him, in
plain English, you would shoot him ? — Did I
not say Uiat, in my original examination: I
had the pistol in my pbcket?

Dirt you tell him "it was empty ?— No.

Did you tell him you would shoot him ?— <-
Yes.

Did you tell him you would shoot him with
an empty pistol ? — No.
. When liasbrook came up, you presented
your pistol to him and tqld him you would
shoot him ? — Yes ; he was running up very
Bear to the office.
'. Then Mr. Rasbrook ran away ? — Yes.

probably he would not have been so ready
to run away, if he had though^, your pistol was
not loaded ? —Probably so.
' The bishop aAer that came to the door ? —
He did.

You told the counsel, upon your original
examination, that when the bishop was at the
door, you called loud enough for every body
to he^r yoU| that you were determined to stand

upon your defence in your officd-^4hat you
then loaded your pistols — that after you made
fast the door, you called out that ^.ou were
determined to defend your possession, and
they must oome in at their peril, if they at-
tempted to come in by force. — Were not your
words, '* that you were armed, and were de-
termined to maintain your possession, and
would shoot the first man who entered by
force ?" — The words are these : When I heard
this loud knocking at the door, I loaded one
pistol with powder and shots, not a ball ; and
I mentioned to the persons at the door <I did
not know who they were), that if any body
forced themselves in, or attempted to force
themselves int that they would do it at their
peril. I repeated again, that the pistol was
loaded, that I was armed with pistols aivt other
weapons ; that if they forcea themselves in,
they would do it at their peril, that I would
shoot the firfet man that entered, that I would
defend myself in the possession of my office ;
or to that effect.

You said you were armed with pistols ? — I
said so, but I had only one; my clerk had
the other pistol.

He was in the office with you ?^Yes«

And that you said loud enough, that
every body on the outside must hear?—
Yes: and then somebody outside said,
will you shoot the bishop ? I said, No, my
lord.

You.heard a voice, desiring to be admitted,
which, you then knew was the bishop, and
you opened the door? — Yes.

How many persons came in with tlie
bishop when he entered? — I cannot tell.

Diaany body come in with him.' — I cannot

»y.

Will you swear he desired any body to come
in with him ? — lie called to several people to
remove me.

When he asked admission, did he bring any
thing in with him, or make use of any expres-
sion, calling upon others to follow him ? — I
will not be positive that he desired any body
to follow him in.

Did the bishop say to fyou, when, he
came in, that he was much surprised that you
should proceed with that force, violence, and
tumult, to come into vour office, when^ if you
wished to have the key, it was lying at the
palace ?~No such thing.

And he never reprehended you for using
any violence ? — He said, '< Fine work !"

Where was your pistol at this time ? — In
my tiocket.

The stock of your pitfol was out of your
pocket was it not?— No; I think the muzzle
of it was; I dare say it was; I am sure it
must. . .

What other arms had you?— None.; I only
said that to intimidate them from breaking in
upon me. • * ,

1^ you any bludeeons ? — I had none.

\Wl you swear that none of the .people
who came in with you had bludge^nt r^

493]

and others fjbr a Riot^

A, b. 1796-

[494

I will vweBT nothing but what I am' posi- 1
tive of.

What are you positive of? — I think they
had* no bludgeon.

Nor any other weapon? — ^They had a
chisel and a hammer tney broke the door
open with.

The bishop ¥ra8 armed with bis handker-
chief, we fina?-— I do not know of any thing
else.

Did you see any arms in the hands of any
body who came afterwards into the office ?— I
did not

Do you know that the bishop had sent for
Mr. Kyffin a magistrate, before he came in P
— ^Noy I never knew any thing of the kind.

When did he send for him P — I heard some-
body say. Is Kyfiin sent for? or to tiiat cffBci;
and he soon came there. '

How long had the bishop been there before
Mr. Kyffia came in? — It was sometime, I
think, before be was sent for.

When the bishop put his fist, in the man-
ner you state, had he bis handkerchief in his
hand ? — No, he held his fists in this manner
(describipg it, as in his original examination)
and said, he would turn me out; he was run-
ning stamping about.

In a great passion, as you describe ; how
lone was this after the bishop came in I — Some
liltio time; I cannot be positive as to the
time he was there.

Did you hear the bishop say to any body
round him, that law must take its course with
you, and desired them not to interfere?— I
did not

When Mrs. Warren aiul the ladies came,
they aJl went away, , I understand P — Yes ;
and the bishop much against his wilL

You loadea your pistol for the purpose of
defending your possession ? — ^I did.

And you were determined to defend your
possession with them, and declared that pub-
licly while this thing was goine onP— I
made no secret of it I mentioned it once,
twice, or three times ; I conceived tliat I had a
right to do it

You say, that this Mr. Gunning, the minor,
is the regtsthur— had you any appointment
from Mr. Gunning ? — I had an aj^pointment
from the bishop; and a confirmation, I con-
ceived, from the son.

Had you a written confirmation from the
son } — I had not

. Had you no appointment by the sonP-^I
had a confirmation . it was with his approba-
tion; I paid* him his rent

His approbation was Unified by your pay-
in^his rent P— From what he spoke to me.

Perhaps it may be an impertinent curiosity;
but I should wish to ask you whether yuu
ever saw this book (showing the witness a
pamphlet)? — I have seen some of these
psmphlets.

You haveread it, probably ?-»! believel have.

You doubt it, perhaps ?— Not in the least '
. Did you ever see it m manuscript P—No.

Nor any part of if?
irdnaf.— Any >art of it ?
Mr. JBriAtne.— Yes, any part of it?— -No, I
did not.

Mr. Adam.-^l am at a loss to know what
this is.

Mr. Justice Heath.-^'Ris seeing it in ma-
nuscript, if it were a libel, would not implih
cate him;

Mr. Enkine. — I may try the witness's credit
with the Jury; I am goin^ to contradict him.
You never saw any part ot it in manuscript ?—
No; I had'two myself, one delivered to
me in London, another sent down into the
countiy.

You did not know that such a work was
writing till it was sent to you — have a care;
go gently ? — You need not caution me ;I have
only to tell you this, that it was mentioned
in the public paper, that a pamphlet against
the bishop wto shortly intended for the press
last year.

Then it was only through the medium of
the public news-pa|;»er that you knew that a
pamphlet was in agitation against the bishop
of Bangor ?— -That was the way I first came lo
know it

As you have read the pamphlet, you will
see' there is a private correspondence between
the bbhop and you, stated in that pamphlet.
—There is. •

How did it happen that this correspondence
got into the hands of any t)ody who, without
your knowledge, composed this pamphlet?-*
It was not without my knowledge. — Some cir-
cumstances attending my resignation of tlie
office under the bishop, his lordship's conduct
towards me, and several other circumstances,
made it necessary for roe to make it known
how it was ; and I gave an account to several
of my friends.

js that any part of it, '' General Grindley's
expedition into the office?'' — Not in thiit.
manner; I told the plain truth as to ge-
neral, or adjutant, I know nothing of thdt
kind.

You only furnished these letters ?— -I deli-
vered an account to several friends, of the bi-
shop's conduct towards me.

But you had no idea that they would find
their way into the bhapc of a pamphlet, to
be circulated through Wales?— Not in the
least

You had no idea of that, till the book was
sent you? — Not at all. When I saw 4t
here, I knew it must be by somebody that had
seen the accoimt which I had written. For
the bishop had proposed that I mieht act,
with respect to some matters in Wales. • {jn
consequence of that, I did act : and aflerwards
he would not sufier me, nor allow me, which
com|>elled me to take the steps I did; and in
justification of my conduct, I did make thia
known.
. Yougavecoptesofyour letters.— I did.

And there they areP-*I do not know that
they are here exact I neVercompafedtlwm*

i95]

86 GEO&GE UI.

Trial tfthe Btskop of Bangor

[496

Did you lee any of these psmpftilets in

Wales? — I have heard of a ^^eat nmy of - his servants to the registrar's office tipoa the

Did you itlcnlMr. Ofindley anl tonw of

them.

Did you see them in circulation in Wales,
before ibis bill of iodactsient was ptefened?—
No ; yeSy I believe.

Yott seem now to be in doubt; are you in
4iny doubt about that^— I an iioi poutive
whether they were before or after ; I really
cannot tell, xxpoa my oath.

But about that time you saw them in cir<>
Nation ?— About that time.
. In pretty large circulation, I believe ?•— I
rdo not know ; tlie one that was seat to me ki
the country — there were several others in the
.same pared — ^limmediately oxderedthatpam-
;phlet to be locked up«

Was that before the indictraent was pr&-
fenred? — ^I rather think after, bat I cannot be
|)ositive about that.

, Nor who wtote tlus pamphlet, you do not
know of course ? — I do not know.

Who mi^ht you ove the copies of your let^
lers to? — ^lo sevenu.

. Who were they P— I think to a Mr. Wil.
liams,x)fTreiFos.

Who else ? — I showed them, and gave them
to many of my friends.
. Did you give copies to any body else?— -I
.do not recflllectthat I did.

Mr. Samutl Grindley re-examined by Mr.

Had yon any message from the bishop, be-
. fore the riot was coamiitted, that the.key was
at the palace for you ? — Positively none.

I. think you said, in your original ezamina-

.tkm, that. after you had tumetiMr. Jones out

•of the office, you had been, for about a quar-

. tor of an hour before the bishop came, ia quiet

possession of it? — ^Yes.

Then the bishop came and said, ^ Turn
. them out ?*' — Yes, after he came in.

My ftiend has asked you about this appoint-
^ment: You paid the bishop, for the use of
the minor, the rent, from time to time, of
. aeventy pounds a year ?— Yes.

Now about these letters: Did you deliver

these letters, and communicate what had

: pas^ between you and the bishop, to your

Iriend, with a view of vindicating yourself? —

- YiCSi, that was my motive: The curiosity of

many was so much excited, that I was enquir-

. ed 01 how it was, and I thought it necessary

to do so.

And you did it with that view, and nothing
elsef — ^Yes.

J4r. JSffsAafK.T*Did you see this tentleman
(Dr.. Owen) in. the room before the bishop lef\
the-roam ?-^I hnve sworn it, and I repeat it

fiy jl^ room you mean the office ?— Yes.

Jokn Sharpe sworn. — Examined by Mr. Ellis,

i

On the seventh of January were you in the
reffiBtnuf8>x)ffite, with Mr. OiiodioYf-^Yes.

X>oywxesQllsct the bii|hop awnittiog to
.Ife. GoiMUaiy,ihalheLhadgiv»ikdiBBctbn»lbr
^rA^king into the registrar's office f««Yes.

morning of the eigblii ? — ^i did not.

Did the bishop tell Mr. Grindlcy that he
might have the Key of the office if he chose to
send for ia?—- On the eontrery^ he refosed,
and said he should not have admjeuoa into
the offioe.

Jokn Sharpe cross-examined by Mr. Flumer>

I beliere you ate the deik that was left at
Bamcor when Mr. Grindlty wentjaway; — No.

Who was the clerk that was left?— Pricbar4.

Had yen the possesdon of the key P — i had.

You had the key of this office in the ab-
sence of Mr.Orindley P*-*It waa delivered to
me by the clerk in Ihe.oftee oa the 7th of
January.

How long had it been in your possession ?
—In the evening of the 6th of January I got
possession of the k^ foom Mr. Dodd, imd
kept possession, of it ail the 7 th.

You had not it befove the evening of the
6th f — I kept possession of the key on the 7th,
which was a hotidsfjr.

Before that time it waa in the possession
of Mr. Dodd ?-^ Yea.

After it was delivered over to you were
not your direotions» not toilet the hishop
have the key P-«-Uiidoubtedly ; the object ef
mv havine the key was to psevent Mr. Dodd,
who we thought might be psevailed upon to
deliver up the key, iik oonsequence of what
had passed with respect to the seals. -

Thinkins that Dodd wodd sot be so much
to be relied upon to keep the key from the
bishop as you, it was for that pOrpoae deli-
vcied to you ?-«I so understood.

I believe, after you had got possesaioB of it,
for the purpose you have desciibed. to pre-
vent the bishop having it, fearing ne woidd
make some tmpropes use of it, al^.'er that time
the bishop sent to yiouibr the key, and' you
refosed it P— It mas for the purpose of pre*
venting him; because Mr. Grindley bad a
number of private papers there, independent
of the archives belonging to the rcgistmr of-
.fice.

These private papers did not relate to the
office, but were private papers of bis own ?— I
do not know ^hat they were, they wtie in a
private desk of his own.

Was that desk locked ?'^Yea«

So he was afraid the bishop should break
. open that lock, and take away his private pa-
pers ? — I cannot suppose that.

This private desk.was..lacked ; and the pro-
ceeding of the courts, and the wills, all the
public documents of Uie court, were in that
office?— They were under iook and key; but
I believe the keys wereilefl in the locks ; Ibey
were aU in places for .public security.

After you.hadg«xl;the/key,^ not the Vi-
shop send to you, to desire to have the kcgr,
andyottrefuMhim?-^The fimi person that
appfaed to me wM:Mr«Dedd« who, I believe,
had been downialongiwltfe the bishop : heap*
plied to me for tbe key.

497]

Mnd athefty far a Hud.

For the bishop >-^Ye8, for the bishop.

Did he ssy it was for the bishop f — I be*
fieveitwas.

At what time of the day was that N*-At
twoB, on the dth : it was a day prior to the
breaking into the office.

Did vou at any time send the key to the
bbhopf-^I did not : tny directions were to
the contrary.

Whether what you did was net in pursu-
ftace of the directions you had received from
Aftr. Gnndley?— Undoubtedly so.

•Ma Sharp€ re<e)camiDed by Mr. Ellis.

Did Mr. Grindle^ eive tou any other direc-
Hons respecting this key, but ** to take care ?''

Mr £rf Actfie.-*4Ie refused to deliver the key
%o the bishop : he had the key on the 5th, he
kept possession all the da^ on the 6th^ and on
the 7th eave it to Mr. Gnndley,

Mr. ifkom.— Was it on the 6th you were
sskedforit?

IFihiett.— It was.

Tkomag Prichard sworn,^ExMmm»A by Mr.

Adam,

What are yoirP — A clerk to Mr. Grindley.

Were you a clerk to Mr. Grindley in Janu-
ary last P— I was.

Were you at Baneor upon the 6th, 7th and
8tb of January last ^-I was there upon the
6th. *^

In the morning of the 8th f— Yes.

You know the situation of the office of the
reflstrar there ?— Yes.

It has a lobby to it, has it not; there is a
iliebtofstepsup to the porch '—Yes.
* There is a door to that porch f— >Yes.
Were you there at the time the door was shut ?
—I was.

Whom did you go with ?-.With Mr. Grind-
ley, and one of his clerks, and three of his
Mrvants.

You got the doors opened, and went into
the office P— Yes.

When you got into the office, did Mr.
Grindley give you any directions how you
were to conduct yourselves ?-^Yes : the bi-
shop's acent came there before we got the
ddoropoi.

What is his name?— Mr. Jones.

Tou put him out P— Yes ; Mr. Grindley did.

After he was gone, what did you do?—
Forced open the inner door^ the door of the

Then Mr. Grindley, and you, and those who
were with him, went inP — Yes.

What was done to the outer door ?— It was
fastnied by one of the men.

WMn you got into the office, what was
done to the inner door P— It was left open.

HM k)fi^ hid you been in the office before
•ny body' came ?— About a quarter uf an houri^
I befitve : I cannot tell certainly.

IVhat passed when any body cameP—- There
'waa'aJotfikDOcling^at the door: I kept on
the inside of the ofl&.

you XXVI,

A. D. 1796. t4dS

When this knocking came at the door, did
you heai^anv voice ?— Not at first.

Afterwards what did you hear?---I heard
somebody say, "Open the doorP* but they
continued knocking a good while before that.

Was there a bawling at the door?— Not at
first. ^

Was there at any time P-^Yes, some per*
sons cried out, " Open the door V*

What did Mr. Grindley do upon that ?—
He walked towards the door.

Did he afterwards open the door?— He ask-
ed who was there first; nobody answered di-
rectly—he asked, I believe, a second time,
who was at the door — he told them, if they
burst the door open he would shoot tiiem —
or something of that kind. They continued
knocking at the door, and soroebodv cried
out, "Open the door!" — Mr. Grindley ih-
quired who was there ; at last somebody call-
ed out, ** Will you open the door to the bi-
shop of Bangor P" Mr. Grindley said, ** I will
open the door to your lordship,'' — and the
door was opened.

Before the door was opened, had Mr.
Grindley given any direction to you, and the
other persons within, how you should condiict
yourselves P— He told us to keep in the office,
and not to come out, and to sit there quiet.

When the bishop came in, what happened?
— He seemed to ne in a very violent pas-
sion ; he followed Mr. Grindley into the of-
fice, and he clenched his fists in this manner
Fdescribing it, his hands hanging down by
nis sides] — and said to Mr. Gnnoley, " Fine
work ! fine work !"-— Mr. Grindley said, ^ So
it is my lord, breakins open m v office in this
manner.**— -'< Your office (said toe bishop) you
have nothing to do with it; you have no hii-
siness here, I insist upon your going out !"—
Mr. Grindlev said, he would not go .out, that
he had a right to be there, and he would main-
tain his right ; that he would pay due respect
to his lordship.-^The bishop was walsing
backwards and forwards in a very great pain
sion, as I thought. Mr. Grindley seated him-
self down by a desk— Mr. Roberts the chap*
lain, Dr. Owen, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Williams,
soon followed him.

They are the defendants? — Yes.

How did they behave themselves P— Very
riotous.

What did they do?«-The bishop told the
chaplain, that Mr. Grindley threatened to shoot
him. The chaplain began to swaeger, and
said, if he would shoot any body he might
shoot him ; he challenged Mr. Gnndley to re-
tire, which he refused at that titne, he said he
had something ^Ise to do, or something of
that kind, but he was at his service another
time. Mr. Grindley was walking backward
and forward.

Do you remember a person of the name of
Roberts, a servant of Mr. Grindley ?— Yes. .

Do you remember a person of the name of
Robert Davis, a servant of Mr. Grindley f '^
Yes. *^

9 K

499]

S6 GEORGE III.

Trud ^ihi Bkhop ofBangcf

£500

Was any thing done to either of themf-^
One of them asked. Who are these fellows ?
who are these ruffians P

Who asked that P— The chaplain, or soroe-
hody else ; he said, who are these ruffians f
Mr. Grindlej said, they were quiet enough.

Bid they continue quietly all this time ?'^
Yes.

Was any thing done to these men ?— The
bishop went up to WilRam Roberts, and laid
bold of him in this manner [taking hold of
his shoulder! and pushed him towards the
door— he laid hold of the bishop's hand, and
disenraged himself, and.went farther on into
the office.

Was any thins done to Robert Davis ?— I
did not see any wing done to him.

Did you see any thing else done by any
other of the defendants? — Mr. Kyffin, the
magistrate, came in soon, and asked what was
the matter ? Mr. Gc^dley said he did not
know; that the bbhop came in, and his
chaplain followed*

Was the bbhop there at that time)— Yes ;
.thai he came witn his chaplun and a great
. nnmber of men, and that he did not know
what was the matter.

How many people might be collected to-
gether at this time f—i cannot tell; there
. might be forty people outside.

What put an end to this P— Mrs. Warren
came into the office to endeavour to take the
. bishop away ; she laid hold of his hand.

Dia he so with her immediately ? — He did

, not;. he pmled bis hand from her, at that time

she kud hold of him, and took him out, but

be did not go out immediately ; they had him

' out at last

Thomn Prkhard cross-examined by Mr.

You have told us all that passed, have you ?
. because you are sworn to teil the whole truth,
. and you have done so, I take for granted ?-tI
cannot recollect every word that passed.

But you have told us the principal circum-
stances that passed? — I believe so.

You have told us all that Mr. Or indley did
at the beginning : As I understood you, the
£rst time Mr. Urindley talked of shootings
was when there was a rapping at the door ;
he asked who vras there, and said,if aov body
. attempted to come in by force he would shoot
. them ; tliat was the - first time he talked of
making use of his pistols, was not it ? — No, I
believe not.

You had heard him before, had you?— Yes,
when the bishbp*s steward came.

The first thing that happened was Mr.
Jones, the bishop s agent, coming in, 1 be-
lieve ?— Yes.

When Mr. Jones came, Mr. Grindlev at-
t^pted to-turja him, out, did not her and
they had a violent struggle X — ^Yes ; \jpax there
•. were no blows. ,

Mr^Grindley was endeavouring to thrust
*bun out ? — Yes.

But Mr. Grindley first ofall hud liold of him
to thrust Hm out of the office, tliat warthe
beginning?— Yes, I believe it was; he placed
himself with his back to the inner door.

The rest were sitting perfectly quiet» and
vou were qdiet all the tine?— I did not touchy
him.

They were all perfectly quiet ?-^AAer that
Mr. Jones came in ainin.

1 am speaking of Hr. Grindley and his peo^
pie ; you were all perfectly quiet ; liad yoM
any of you a pistol ?— Yes, I had a pntol.

So, Mr. Grmdlej directs you to be perfectly
quiet, and puts a pistol into your hand P— II
was an empty pistol.

And there was no powder and shot there;?
^ I had none..

There was no powder and shot there ?-^I»>
deed I had none.

There vras^. none there ?-^Mr. Grindku
loaded his pistol.

Was there no powder and shot there, eieept
what Mr. Grinaley used to load his pistol
with P — I had none, nor had any of the others
that I know of.

When the bishop came in,you sav he walk'
ed backwards and forwardsr with bis hnide
clenched in this position [describing it, hie
hands hanginfi; down by bis sides] ?— Yes.

Apparently in a passion, and saying^*' Fine
work?"— Yes.

Walkine about with his hands down in thia
manner [aescribins it as before]?— I cannot
say they were so all the time.

But when he caime in, you Wf the bishcnr
held his hands in that Banner, with his hands
clenched, and said. '' Fine work ?'^'-*«Yes;

When you said they behaved riotously, you
have told us all that passed, and what yeu
ufnderstood to be riotous, was the bishop's be-
ing in a passion P-^Yes.

you say some one asked who these ruffiaia
were ? Who mad^ use of that expression, you
do not know ?— >l am not very sure.

Upon vour oath, was doctor Owen in the
office at the same time with the bishop F-rYes,
I believe he was.

Will you swear it positive^ ?— I beUiive he
was.

Before ^ou said positively, now wiU yc|it
swear positively, that he was there at the same
time with the bishop ?-r-To the best of mgr re-
collection he was.

Do yon recollect enoueh to swear pesitiv^y
one way or the other ?-^I believe he was. .

Will you swear positively that he was? no
you, or not, recollect with sufficient certain^
to swear it positively ? — I believe he was there.
Then you will not swear positively P-^He
w^ there I believe at the same timo thai the
bishop wu.

You will say no more than you believt. tt
was a marketrday, was not it, at Bangor F-t^
No; the market day is on a SatMid«y, that
was on a Friday. . , *

Was it, or not, market day at Vka^^^l
believe not.

S$l}

mut^therSfJar a Rioi.

A. D. 1796.

[508

Do 70a liw At Bangor N-No; Saturday is
the vamkieUdKf there.

Will you swear that SaturdaT is the market-
day at Bangorr— Yes; they keep a market
cheio 00 Saturday.

Will you swear that Friday Is not the mar*
leei^ay f — ^They mi|;ht sell tratchers meat, or
aomethtDg of that kind.

An you coming here to swear to what you
kDow, or what you do not knowf what day
is the markeUday F— Saturday is a market-day

uMfOa

Yott understand what is meant by the mar*
kei^y, do not you F— Yes.

Wilfyou swear now, onoe more, that Friday
aa not the market-day, why every body knows
what is meant by the market<iay ?— Yes, I

Then will you awear that Friday is not the
market-day?— It is Saturday, to the best of
my knowledge.

' Do you know whether it is or not ?— I am
not very sure.

Are you as eertain about the rest you have
been swearing to, as you are about the market-
day — I ask you, upon your oath, whether it
was not market-day — whether the several
people that came up, did not come out of cu-
riosity f—Tb^ did not all come from the
market

' These forty people dkl not come with the
bishop ?-^I do not know from where they

TkmnM Prichard re-examined by Mr. Adam.

You do not reside in Bangor ? — No.

\w are an engrossing clerk to Mr. Grind-
ley?*-! am' employed in his office.

Have you any particular reason to know any
thing about the market-day, one way or an-
other ?— I really forget

Jakm I^bauu sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Mauletf.

W}M are you ?— A writer of Mr. Grindley's.

Were you with Mr. Grind ley, at Bangor,
00 the rooming in which he took possession
of this office f — Yes.

We are told it was about nine or ten in the
morning r— Yes.

After vou had broke open the door, what
M you do to the outer door, after vou got in
possession of the office f — Fastened the outer
door with an hon wedge.

Afler you had listened yourselves in, how
long did you continue in the office before you
bewd anybody at the door? — We continued
there about a quarter of an hour.

Did you hear a noise at the door then?—
Tes, I heard a raptiiog at ihe outer door.

Did Mr. Grindiey mj any thing upon that
rapping, or do any thing? — Mr. Grindlev
asked who was there ; some person tiieresaid,
open the door ; then Mr. Grindiey charged his
pistol with powder and shot

Having so charged it, did he say any thmg
befora be opened the door to the perBoni out-

side?—He aaid that be was armed* and any
persons that forcibly eoiered in^ ne wuuld '
shoot them.

Did he say that out aloud, so that persons
night bear it without the door f— Yes, be was
dose to the door when he siud it

What day is market-day at Bangor?— Fri- .
day.

Perhaps you are a native of Bangor f— No.

Do yoii live near it P— No. •

When Mr. Grindiey said, if you forcibly
open the door I will shoot any person that
does it; was that said once or twice, or oftener ?
— He said, you will not shoot me ; open the
door for the bishop of Bangor ; Mr. Grmdlr)r
•aid, yes, my lord, I will open to your lord-
ship ; th^ door was opened.

when the door was opened, did any body *
come into the office ?— The bishop entmd in.

What ^te of mind did he appear to be in?
*— In a violent rage ; he came in stamping his
feet ; he widked tow^ds Mr. Grindiey, and
said, fine work, fine work!— Mr. Grindiey
repeated, yes, fine work, in breaking open
ray office ; whoever did it shall repent it

What did the bishop do farther ?— -The bi-
shop said, " Your office! you have no right to
be here, you must quit it immediatel;^ ;" or
words to that effect Mr. Grindiey said, he
had a right to be there. The bishop conti-
nued to be in a rage there all the while.

How did he show that he was in a raee ?—
He was stamping his feet, and walking about ;
he went towards Mr. Grindiey very oflen,
as if he had a mind, as I thought, to collar
him.

How did he hold his hands, when you say
you thought he meant to collar him ?— His
hands were clinched, and he was walking
about close to Mr. Grindiey.

Do you recollect what he said besides ?—
No.

Do you know Dr. Owen ?— Yes.

Did you see the bishop do any thing to any
of the persons that were there?— Yes ; to one
William Roberts; he ordered his people to
turn him out, and desired that he would make
out ; he fastened at his collar, and grappled at
him, and wanted to push him towards the
door ; upon this William Roberts took hold of
his hand, and disengaged himself, got clear
from him.

Did you see him do any thing to any other
person ?— No.

Did you see him do any thing to Robert
Davis ?— No.

Did you see Dr. Owen there ?— Yes.

What time did he come there?— I cannot
tell.

Was he there before the bishop went away ?
—Yes.

How long before the bishop went away had
be been there?— Sometime before the bishop
went away.

Did 70U bear bim saj or do any thing F—
No; he was in a great passion, talking or
doing somethiBg or other; talking and laugh-

SOS]

36 GEORGE lU.

Trial qfihg BUKop ^Bangair

[901

iQig ; ai^ talking i|i veiy high woidsy likt tht
I98t of diem. , ,

And that was before the bishop went awi^ ?
—Yes.

Do you recollect any of those high words \
—I do not recollect.

Was the reverend Mr. Roberts there? —
Yes.

How soon did be come f— He came soon
^ter the bishop.

Did be come before Dr. Owen^ or afler
him ? — Before Dr. Owen.

When the reverend Mr. Roberts came, what
didhe say or do?«-He came in very violent,
with his fist clinched, and in an abusive and
riotous manner ; and said, he would turn us
out. l^e bishop told Mr. Roberts that Mr.
Grin^ey was armed with pistols. Then he
held his coat open^ and said, if you shoot any i
body„ shoot me ; then he challenged Mr.
Grindley to retire.

What was he to retire for? — ^To retire, as I
thoueht, to fisht.

Wiiere was ne to retire to ? — )FIe wanted him
to retire, pointing with his hand out of doors,
and he pomted his head on one side^ as if
challenging him to come out.

What did Mr. Grindley say to that ?— He
declined coming then, but he should be ready
at bis service at another period.

Was the bishop present at this time ?^-He
wag present.

And heard what Roberts said ? — He was in
the ofgce.
Mr. Roberts is his chaplain ? — Yes.
Did you see the reverend Dr. Owen
there? — Dr. Owen was not come in at that
time.
Did you see John Williams there ?— Yes.
' The reverend Mr. Williams, how soon did
he come?--^He wa^ ther^ at the beginning.
Before or after Mr. Roberts ? — After.
What did he do?*^Uc was there among
the rest, talking this and that, and wransling
there; there was a great noise amongst^tnem.
, Did you see Thomas Jones ? — ^Yes.
Was he there ?— Yes»

' When did he /come ? — ^Soon af\er the bishop.

Did Thoj^as jpnes come before Dr. Owen,

or after ?^I think he came before Dr. Owen.

Have you the least doubt whether Dr.

Owen was there before the bishop went away ?

i^He was there before the bisdiop went away.

How long might they stay there, in the*

whole? — An hour, or thereabouts.

Were there other persons about the door?
—There were a great number of persons abcnit
the door.

Did any of the by-standers do any thing ?—
One of the by-standers,when the bishop said,
turn the people out, turn them out — one oL
t))em at last advanced into the inner office,
and said to the others in Welsh,—*' Shall we'
take hold of them P come, come, let us take
hold of theni," — Mr. Grindley moved fixim
the door where he then was.
During this time^ what bad become of VLx*

Grindley*» servants and persons.»-Mr. Onitd«
ley ordered them to go to the window, but that
they should not gp out. Mr, Grindley, when
he saw the man advancing-**

What was that man's name? — I do not
know; upon the man advancing in, Mr.
Grindley said, peace is what I want; I shaU '
not quit this office. — He said, peace was what '
he wanted, and this office was his castle* — Mr.
Grindley laid his hand upon his pistal» Mpoa
which the man retreated. . ^

The man that had said, "* ShaU we turn ,
them out?"— -Yes.

Did any persons come there to the^bisbuPl
afterwards; did you see Mrs. Warren there r
—Yes.

How was the bishop got out of the .office ? -
— Mrs. Warren came mto thie office with two .
ladies requesting him to cone out.

Did he go out upon her rfsquesting him?—
He did not ; he was not inclined to^.out.

What temper was he in at that ^we? — He
was in a violent rage idl the time; he would:
not go out at first— he mentkMied that Mr.
Grindley had pistols, that he was armed — ^I*
believe she was a little alarmed ; then she.
took hold of his hand, and then look him
by his arm and wanted to take hi» out»
but he struggled from her, and. irould not
go ; he wanted to talk more with Mr. .Grind*.
ley ; they were talking one wnongst another,
all of them.

He did go out soon afterwards, I believe?—.
He did.

Did the reSt of the der^ go with hSm ? —
All of them went with him, but Mr. Wil-
liams. '

Do you recollect whether Dr. Owen went:
out With bun?— Dr. Owen, I thinki went out
before him.

Was Dr. Owen in the room after the bishop^
had gone out at all?— I cannot recollect that.
But whetheir -he came before, or no, you
cannot tell ? — I do net recollect— He came
with a paper for a receipt ficom Mr. Grindley ;
he wanted n receipt from Mr. Griqdley.

That was after the bishop was gone out ?^^>
It was when the bishop was there ; he was,
not quite gone out

How long did Mr. Williams st^y there afteri
the bishop was gone?— ^I cannot recollect;
I4r. Grindley said he was ready to transact'
any business, if he had an^; Mr. Williams
said, the bishop desired of him to slay there. »

John Thomoi cross- exaoiined by Mr. MtlUi.

You describe vourself as an engrosaiog.
clerk of Mr. Grinclley's ; is that your business r,
—As a writing clerk.

Have you any other pailicular intereef
about the business of Mr. Grindley ? — No; I
go here and there upon errands*

Perhape those ernmds are about notes;,
do not you negotiate a Utile paper for -iMr..
Grindley ?

Mr. ^liaiii.— With what view do yea pit
thatqueslien?

and Men f fir a Rioi,

5051

Mr, IfiUet*— to sbov that ths witness is
deeply interested with Grindley.

Mr. Justice Beatk, — ^You are not to go into
Grindley*s private afiairs^

Mr. iJfiMB».— Itdoes not signify* You came
with these people trom Baiwor Ferry ? — ^Yos.

How many were there ofyou ?— There was
m blacksmith, two servants, a clerk and
myself.
Two pistols ?-*We bad no pistols coming.
Where did you happen to find them f — Tney
were bor^wed somewhere.

How many men of you bad bludgeons?-—
Smallsticks.
Short stick* f—-I had none.
I do not suppose they would put you upon
that little snort sticks, that when in the
pockety woidd just appear out of it? — No;
Ih^ were too long for that.

They had none of them such sticks as
those? — ^No; every one had a stick in his
hand«

When vou ^ame into the office, what was
yoor employment at first ? — ^I was ordered to
oome there with Mr. Gnndley.

Did you see all that passed ; did you see
Basbrook come?*-4 dia not see him come
atalL

You did not see your masteti GrindlejTy pre-
sent the pistol to Basbrook ? — No, I was in the
office then, and did not see that

I understood you the bishop came into the
office, and the others came after this f — Yes.

When the bishop came into the office, the
nwale of Grindley's pistol was out of his
pocket, I believe?— Tne pistol was in his
pocket

Where was the other pistol P^The other
pistol was unloaded, with one of his clerks. I

Was it not upon the desk when the bishop
Qtme in ?-*No ; it was in the clerk's pocket,
and Mr. Grindley had the other.

Was not that pistol upon the desk while you
were there ?— J did not see it there.
You swear that ? — ^I do.
You saw the desk?---I did: I was going
backward and forward.

When the bishop oame in, this converaation
passed — ** Fine work ! fine work V* — be was
then walking about in a passion ?
. He moved his bands so [describing it — his
hands down by his sides,] — Yes.

Did you hear all that passed between the
bishop and Grindley? — Yes.

Dio you bear the bishop say this— ''Those
were toe public rscords, and it was his duty
to take care that the public records were not
in immoper handsf — ^I cannot say for that

Dia not the bishop say. ** The pubTic re*
cords are here ; tl^y are of importance to the
country, and it is unfit they should be In Im-
proper hands P^— I did net hear any thing of
that ; my eye was very ofUn upon the people

A.D. 1796. [506/

her the attitude of his hands ; but jon canno^
remember whether he said any thmg of this
sort in his conversation with Mr. Grindley ?-^
I do not.

Do you remember Grindley putting a writ
into the bishop's hand ?— I do.

When was it that he put a writ in his hand i
— ^He served him with a writ, and put it into
the bishop's hand ^ the bishop read it, anil said
he would answer it

Did he say that in a passion?-— Yes, he was
in a passion.

Then from the time he came in till he went
away with Mrs. Warren, the bishop was in
one continued passion, equally violent during
the whole time he was in the room ? — Yes.

Did yeu see Mr. Kyffin, a justice of the
peace, come in ? — ^Yes.

The bishop was in a passion then^ was he f
— He was in a pasuon for a long time, for
some time.

Was he in a passion when Mr. Kyffip caoie
in, aye or no ? You do not lemeiuber thai,
perhaps?— No.

Did you see Mr. Kyffin come in a second
time? — I saw him once only; I saw him
talking with Mr. Grindley.

When you saw Mr. Kymn with Mr. Grind*^
ley, did you see Dr. Owen with him? — I ceo*
not recollect.

When Mr. Grindley sud, ^' peace is what I
want, and every man's house is liis castle," he
put his hand into his pocket and took out a
pistol ?'~*Yes.

Did not he persevere all the time in sayings
he would defend his possession to the
uttermost ?— That he woula not quit the office.

Robert Davit sworn.

ling one with another, the bishop and eve^
^Moeof fehen.
€o younmember liis passion, you remem-

[He not speaking English, an interpreter was

sworo.J

Mr. Justice H^c/A.— What do you call this
witness to prove ?
Mr. £//«.— Only to prove the safne facts.
Mr. Adam. — I will rest the case here.

[The end of the evidence for the Prosecution.]

DEFENCE.

Thehonounibk Tkomat Ertkine;

Gemtlemcn of the ji]aY:--My Learned
Friend,' in opening the case on the part
of. the Prosecution, has, fh)m personal
kindness to me, adverted to some sucoessful
eiertions in the duties of my profession, and
particularl)r In this place. It is true, that I
nave been in the practice of the law for veiy
many years, aad more than once, upon me-
morable occasions, in this coort; yet, with
all the experience which, in that long lapse
of time, the most inattentive anaa may bo
supposed to have collected, I feel mjrself
wholly at a loss in what manner to address

at tbe46or, upon thekr talking so, and wrang- you. I speak tinafiededly when I say, that I

sever Ml myself in so complete a state of
embarrassment in the course of my profea-
sM>nfld life;— indeed, I hardly kno^ bow to

flOT] 86 GETORGB III.

Trial ^tht BiAop ^Bangor

[508

coQect ibv faculties at all, or in what fa9hioii
to deal witli this most eitraordinary subject
When my Learned Friend, Mr. Adam, spoke
from himu^f and from the emanations of as
bonourable a mind as ever was bestowed upon
»ny of the human species, I know that he
spoke the truth when ne declared bis wish to
conduct the cause with all chanty, and in the
true spirit of Christianity]. — But his duties
were scarcely compatible with his intentions ;
and we shall, therefore, have, in the sequel,
to examine how much of his speech was hit
otpn candid address, proceeding from kim$elf;
and what part of it may be considered as ar-
rows ^m the quiver of his cLisitT.^-The
cause of the Bishop of Ban^ can suffer no-
thing; from this tribute, which is eqally due
to friendship and to justice: — on the contrary,
I sliould have thought it material, at any rate,
to advert to the advanta^ which Mr. Grind-
ley might otherwise derive from being so re-
presented.— I should have thought it right to
Sard you against blending the Client with
e counsel. — It would have been my duly to
warn you, not to confound the one with the
other, lest,' when jrou hear a liberal and in-
gjsnuous man, dealing, as he does, in humane
and conciliating expressions, and observe him
with an aspect of gentleness and moderation,
you might be led by sympathy to imagine that
such were the feelings, and that such had
been the conduct, of the roan whom he re-
presents.*—On the contrary, I have no diffi-
culty in asserting, and I shall call upon his
Lordship to pronounce the law upon the sub-
ject, That you have before you a prosecution,
set on foot without the smallest colour or
foundation — a prosecution, haCKbed in mis-
chief and in malice, by a man, who is^ by his
own confession, a disturber of the public
peace'; supported throughout by persons who,
upon their own testimony, 'have been his ac-
complices, and who are now leaeued with
him iu a cjonspiracy to turn the tables of jus-
tice^ upon those, who came to remonstrate
against their violence, who honestly, but
vainly, endeavoured to recall them to a sense
of their du*y, whose only object was, to pre-
serve the public peace, and to secure even the
sanctuaries of religion from the violation of
disorder and tumult.

' What then is the cause of my embarrass*
ment f ^It is this. — In the extraordinary tiroes
in which we live ; amidst the vast and porten-
tous changes which have shaken, and are
shaking the world; I cannot help imagine

* No observation can be more just than
this.-r-It is the most consummate art of an
advocate, when he knows that an attack is
iikely to be made upon his Client, for Uirbu-
lenoe and malice, to make the Jury think,
bjT his whole speech and demeanor, that
mildness and justice were his characteristics ;
and Mr. Adam appears^ with great ability, to
have fulfilled this duty. EdUor ^ Ertkimie^

ing, in standing up for a Defendant against
such Prosecutors, tnat the religion and order,
under which this country hasexisted for ages,
had been subyerted ; that anarchy had set up
her standard ; that misrule had usurped the
seat of justice, and that the workers of this
confusion and uproar had obtained tbe power
to question their superiors, and to subject them
to Ignominy and reproach, for venturing only
to remonstrate against their viofence, and lor
endeavouring to preserve tranquillity, by
means not only hitherto accounted legal, but
which tbe law has immemoriallv exacted
as an indispensablx butt frOiii ail the sub-
jects of this realm. Hence, it really is, that
my embarrassment arises; and, however this
may be considered as a strong figure in speak-
ing, and introduced rather to captivate your
imaginations, than gravely to solicit }roiir
judgments, yet let me ask you. Whether it b
not the most natural train of ideas that can
occur to any man, wbo has been eighteen years
in the profession of the English law \

In tbe first place. Gentlemen, Who are the
parties prosecuted and prosecuting ^— What
are the relations they stand in to each other f
—What are the transactions, as they have
been proved by themeslves?— What is the law
upon the subiect?— and. What is the spirit
and temper, the design and purpose of this
nefarious prosecution \

The parties prosecuted are, tbe Right Re-
verend Prelate, whose name stands first upon
the Indictment, and three ministers and
members of his church, together with another,
wbo is added (I know not why) as a Defend-
ant—The person prosecuting is — (kot^kall I
dneribe kknf) — ^For surely my Learned Friend
could not be serrous, when he stated the re-
lation between this person and the l^shop of
Baneor.— He told you, most truly, which
ren^rs It less necessary for me to take up
jrour time upon the subject—that tbe Bishop
IS invested with a very large and importaBti
iurisdiction— that, by the ancient laws of this
Kingdom, it extends to many of tbe most ma-
terial objects ill civil life: that is, has the
custody and recording of wills, the panting
of administrations, and a jurisdiction over
many other rights, of tbe deepest moment to
the personal property of the Ring's subjects.
—He told }rou, also, that all these compli-
cated authorities, subject only to tbe appellate
jurisdiction of the Metropolitan, are vested in
tbe Bishop. — To which ne might have added
(and would, no doubi, if Ma caute watild have
admitted the addition), that thb Bishop niM-
SELF, and not his temporary clerk, has, io
the eye of the law, the custody of the records
of his church ; and that he also is the person
whom the law looks to, for tbe due adniini^
tration of every thin^ committed to bis care;
— his subordinate oflkers beiaj^ of course, re-
sponsible to Ami for tlie execution of what tba
law reauires at A«i hands.

As tne king himself, who is the fountain of
all jurisdictions, cannot exercise them biroseir.

609]

Mndcih€r$,/afaBkt.

A. D. 179&

[510

but only by tubstitutes, judicml and minist^
rial, to whom, in the various subordinations
of magistracy, his executive authority is dele-
Ipted ; so in the descending scale of ecclesias-
tical authority, the Bishop also has his subor-
dinates to assist him judiciaBy, and who have
again Meir subordinate officera and servants
for the performance of those duties committed
by law to the Bisjiop himself; but which he
exercises through tne various deputations
which the law sanctions and confirms.

The Consistory Court, of which this man is
the Deputy Registrar, is the Bishop's Court.
—For the fulfilment of its duties, the law has
allowed htm his chancellor and superior
judges, who have under them, in the differ-
ent ecclesiastical divisions, their surrogates,
who have again their various subordinates ;
the Uwnif and la$t^ and least of whom, is the
Prosecutor of this Indictment ; who neverthe-
less considers the cathedral church of Bangor,
and the Court of the Bishop's see, as his own
castle: and who, under that idea, asserts
the possession of it. even to the exclusion rf
the Bishop himself^ by violence and armed re-
listance !— -Do you wonder now, Gentlemen,
that I found it difficult to handle this prepos-
terous proceeding ?— The Registrar himself
(putting deputation out of the guestion) is the
very lowest, last, and least of the creatures
of the Bishop's jurisdiction ; without a shadow
of jurisdiction himself, either judicial or mi-
nisterial.— He sits, indeed, amongst the re-
cords, because he is to resister the acts which
are there recorded ; but he sits there as an c^
^cer ^ the Bishops and the office is held
under the chapter part of the cathedral, and
within its consecrated precincts, where the
Bishop has a jurisdiction, independent of all
those which my Friend has stated to you — a
jurisdiction, given to him by many ancient
statutes, not merel}r for preserving that tran-
quillity which civil order demands eveiy
where ; but to enforce that reverence and
solemnity, which religion enjoins, within its
sanctuaries, throughout the whole Christian
^orld«

Much has been said of the Registrar's firee-
' hold in his office :-^but the term which he
has in it — viz. for life— *arose originally from
an indulgence to the Bishop who conferred
it ; and it is an indulgence which still remains,
notwithstanding the restraining statute of
Elisabeth. — ^The Bishop's appointment of a
' Registrar is, therefore, oindms upon his suc-
cessor ;— but bow binding ?— Is it binding to
. exclude the future Bishop from his own ca-
thedral ?^Is it true, as this man preposte-
rously supposes, that, because he chooses to
put private papers of his own, ;Where no pri-
vate papers ought to be — ^because he thinks
fit to remove ttem from his own house^ and
put tliem into the office appointed only f>r
this records of the public— because he mixes
, bia own particular accounts with the aichivea
of Hip diocesa^that therefore, forsooth, he
.bas a^i^t tt>9ust the Bishop frgm tbaoffices

of his own Court, and with pistols, to resiH
his entrance/if he comes even to eiyoin quiet
and decency in his church ^—Surely Bealam
is the proper forum to settle the rights of such
a claimant.

The Bishop's authority, on the central^, is
so universal throughout his diocese, that it is
laid down by Lord Coke, and followed by all
the ecclesiastical writers down to the present
time, that though the freehojd in every church
is in the parson, yet that freehold cannot oust
the jurisdiction of the Ordinary, who has a
right, not merely to be present to visit the
conduct of the incumbent, but to see that the
church is fit for the service of religion : and
so absolute and paramount is his jurisdiction,
that no man, except by prescription, can even
set up or take down a monument, without his
license; the consent of the parson, thonffk
the freehold is in him, being held not to os
sufficient. The rieht, therefore, conferred by
the Bishop on tlie Registrar, and binding (as
I admit it to be) upon himself and his suc-
cessor, is the rizht to perform the functions
of the office, and to receive the legal emolu-
ments.^-The Registrar may also appoint his
Deputv, but not in the manner my Learned
Friend has affirmed ; for the Registrar caa
appoint no Deputy without the Bishop's con-
sent and approbation. My Learned Friend
has been also totally misinstructed wi^rejgard
to the late judgment of the C^nirt of King's
Bench on the sulyect — He was not concerned
in the motion ; and has only his report of it
from his Client.*^Mr. Gnndley was repre-
sented in that motion by a Learned (Counsel,
who now assists me in this Cause, to whom I
desire to appeal. — ^The Court never pro-
nounced a syllable which touched upon the
controversy of to-day; on the cootnwy, its
judgment was wholly destructive or Mr.
Grindley's title to bo Deputy— for it held,
that the inftint, and not his natural gnardian,
liad, with the Bishop's approbation, the ap-
pointment of his Deputy ; whereas Mr. GrincU
ley was appointed by YU9 father onfy^ and not
by the infant at all, which my mend well
knew, and, therefore, gave parol evidence of
his possession of the office, instead of pro-
ducing his appointment, which would have
been fatal to his title: and the reason why
the Court refused the mandamus, was, b^
cause Mr. Roberts, who applied for it, was
not a legal deputy. It did not decide, that
the Prosecutor wqs the legal officer, but
only that Mr. Roberts mmii not : and it decided
that he wof sol, because he bad only the ap-
pointment of the infant's father, which wb«,
by the bye, the only title which the prosecu-
tor .had himself: and although the infant was
a lunatic, and could no Ipnger act in that re-
spect for himself, yet the 0>urt determined
that his authority did, not devolve to the f»-
ther, but to the Court of Chancery, which has,
by law, the custody of all lunatics.

This judgment was perfectly coireet, sad
supports soy pioposition. That the Fnnecutor

511] S6 GEORGE UL

Trial of the Bukop o^ Bangor

[51f

%as m mere tenant at will of ^e Qishop.-^
The infant can, indeed, appoint his ^Deputy,
but not ex nu€uUiUe ret. as mv Friend sup-
poses; OB the contrary, he will find the rea-
son given by the Court of King's Bench, as
far l«ck as the reisn of Charles the First, as
it is reported by that great manstrate, Mr^
Justice Croke. It is there said, that an infant
can appoint a deputy, beeanae the act requires
ns ducretion, t)ie approbatwnf which i$ tanta'
mount to the choice, being in the Bishop* — ^The
continuance nuist, therefbre, in common
aense, be in the Bishop also; for otherwise,
the uiknt having no discretion, a proper |>er-
son might be removed indiscreetly, or an im-
proper person might never be removed at all.
—I roattotain, therefore, on the authority of
the ancient law, confirmed by the late deci-
sion of the Court of Ring's Bench, tn this very
MM, that the Prosecutor, who is so forward to
oiaintain a [Hivilege, which he could not have
snaintained, even if he had been Judge of the
Court, and Chancellor of the Diocese, had,
in fact, no more title to tlie office than I have.
— *He tells you, himself, that he never had
any appointment from the infant, but from
the fatner only, with the infanVs and the hi-
sbof/s approbation ; in other words, he was
the deputy de facto : but, as such, I assert he
was a mere tenant at will ; and consequently
became, to all intents and purposes, a private
man^ from the moment the Bishop signified
:his deterniination to put an end to hu office;
and that the Bbhop had signified his deter-
minsftion before the transaction in question,
•Mr« Orindley has distinctly admitted also. I
itboMffbt, indeed, I should be more likely to
get that truth from him, by concealing from
£im the drift of my examination ; and he,
ther^re, swore, roost easerly, that the bi-
shop did not offer him the Key at the nalace ;
but that, on the contrary, he had told him
.dialinotly,that he was no longer in the office.
He says, besides, that the Bishop expressed
•the same determination by a letter ; in answer
4o which he had declared his resolution to
bold it till the year expired. — ^I say, therefore,
that the prosecutor, at the time in question,
was net Deputy Registrar, and that, the in-
fiuit being a lunatic, the Bishop had a right
to cive charge of the office till another was
duly appointed.— This point of law I will put
4>n the record, if my Friend desires it.

But why should 1 exhaust myself with this
.collateral matter : since, in my view of the
'Subject, it signifies nothing to the question
we have to consider? It sienifies not a faiw
thing to the principles on which I presently
mean to rest my defence, whether he was an
•UMii^per^ or the legal deputy, or the inAuit
^imsall with his patent in his hanfl«

. Let us now, thereibre, attend to what this
-man did, whatever eharacter belonged tohim.
— This is principally to be collected from the
Prosecutor's own testimony, wbidi is^pen to
XwmettX observationa. -My Learned Friend,
"ute stated tp you in hisabstnc^^tlie evidence

be expected from him, expteined, with great
distinctness, the nature and obli^tion of an
oath ; and, speaking from Ait omn honest sen-
sations, and anticipating the evidence of his
Client, from the manner oa would, as a wit-
ness, nave delivered hb own, — ^he told you,
that you would hear from him, a plain, unvar-
nished statement-^that he would keep back
from you uo circumstance, nor wish to sive a
colour to any part of the transaction*— What
induced my Friend to assure us, with so much
solicitude, that his witness would adhere so
uniformly to the truth, I cannot imagine, un-
less he thought that his evidence stood in
need of some recommendation. — All I can
say Is, that he did not in the least deserve the
panegyric which was made upon him, for he
did not ^ive an unvarnished statement of the
very beamning of the transaction, which pro-
duced all that followed.— I asked him. Whe-
ther, in refusing the key, he did not mean to
keep an exclusive possession of the office, and
to prevent the Bishop even from coming
there f-^But, observe how the gentleman
fenced with this plain auestion— ^' I did not^
he said, *' r^se Aim the Aey, hut only lest he
** should take poMefftba.''— Tasked him anin,
<« If he did not positively refuse the key r"—
and desired the answer to he taken down. — ^At
that moment my friend, Mr. Manly, very
seasonably interposed, as such a witness re-
quired to be dry-nursed ; and at last he said,
** OA, the key was included**

The Bishop, therefore, was actually and
wilfiilly excluded wholly from the office. For,
notwithstanding Mr. Grindley's hesllation,
Mr. Sharpe, who foUowed him, and who had
not heard his evidence,.^'om f Ae a^tfnetset being
kept apart, swore distiiictlt and atovce,
that the key was taken from Dodd, because
Grindley thought he would let the bishop
have it; and the witness said farther— f I*
pledge myteff to his words^ — ^"it was, TEsae-
fore, delivered into • my cusiodt, and i
revused xt to tse bisbop — i did so bt
Mr. Grindlet's direction, undoubt-

edly,'*—

The verv beeinning of the tmnsaction, then,
is the total excJusion of the bishop from his own
court f by a person appointedoniy to act as Dmi-
ty, fy Att owm consent f and during his own w%ll;
WHICH WILL Ae had absolutefy determined be^
fort the time in question. I am, therefore, all
amasement, when it shoots across my mind,
that I am exhausting my strength in defend-
ing the Bishop ; because, most undoubtedly,
I snoold have been counsel fi>r Aim as a Pro*
seeuior, in biinging his opponents to justice.
— According to this new trystem, I would have
- TBS J>irDGGtf-take cRre hew thev conduct thei»-
selves. The office-keepeifs or the records of
the Courts at Westminster, are held by pa-
tent; even the Usher's phtce of Hie Court of
King's Bench is for life ; re toe is aHowed fo
appoint bis deputy, who is the man that puta
wafers into Our'nbxes, and papers into' Mr
drawers^ and who hands us etir letten in tto

SIS]

Mnd otherSi Jbr a Rioi^

A. D. 1796.

[514

cleft of a ttiek. But, nevertheless, I would
haye their lordships take care how they ^
into the Court of King's Beach, which, it
seems, is this man*8CASTLB. — IfMr.Hewitwere
to makeanoiseanddisturb the Court, and Lord
Kenyon were to order him to be pushed, out,
I suppose we should have his Lordship at the
next assizes for a riot. — Suppose any of the
Judges wished to inspect a record in the Trea-
sury Chamber, and the clerk should not only
refuse the key, but maintain his possession
vrith pistols ; would any man in his senses ar-
gue that it was either indictable or indecent
to thrust him out into the street ?— yet, where
is the difference between the attendants on a
court civil, and a court ecclesiastical } Where
is the difoence between the Keeper of the
Becordsof the Coint of King's Bench, or Com-
mon Pleas, and the Registrar of the Consis-
tory of Bangor.

To all this I know it may be answered,
That these observations (supposing them to
be well fotmded) only establish the Bishop's
right of entry into his office, and the illeg;a1
act of the Prosecutor in taking an exclusive
possession ; but that they do not vindicate the
Bishop for having first taken off the lock in
his absence, nor for afterwards disturbing him
in the possession which he had peaceably re-
gBuned ; that the law was open to him, and
wat his personal interference was illegal.

To settle this point, we must first have re-
course to facts, and then examine how the
law applies to them.

It stands admitted, that though Mr. Grind-
ley knew that the Bishop had oetermined his
willy and had insisted on his surrender of his
situation, which he never held but by the Bi-
shop's sufferance, he absolutely refused the
ke^y with the design to exclude him from the
office. — It was not till lAen, tliat the Bishop,
having no other means of access, ordered the
lock to be taken off*, and a new key to be made.
•—Now, whether this act of the Bishop's was

SI or illeeal, is wholly beside the question
is Lord^p is not charged with any force
or illegality on that account; he is not accused
even in the counsel's speech, with any impro-
priety in this proceedine, except an intrusion
into this imaginary castle of Mr. Grindley. —
It is admitted^ in short, that the Bishop, took
a possession altogether peaceable.

His Lordship then, having removed the De-
puty Registrar, without due authority, if yuu
please, and being (if you will, for any thing
which interests my argument) in possession,
contrary to law^ let us see what follows. —
And in examining this part of the evidence,
upon which, indeed^ the whole cote depends, I
am not driven to the common address of a
Counsel (at a Defendant in a criminal prose-
cution; I am not obliged to entreat you to
suspend jomt judgments till you hear the
other aide — ^I am not anuous to caution you
to withhold implicit credit from the evidence,
tUl the whole of it is before you. — No, Gen-
tlemen-^I am so far from being in that pain-^

VOL. XXVI.

ful predkanient, that though I know above
halfof what you have hem is not tnie; al-
though I know that the transaction is dis-
torted, perverted, and exaggerated in every
limb and member; yet I oesire that you will
take it as it is, and find your verdict upon the
foundation of its truth.— Neither do I desire
to seduce your judgments, by reminding you
of the delicacy of the case. — My Friend de-
clares he does not know you personally, but
that he supposes you must have a natural
sympathy in protecting a person in the B'r-
sbop's situation against an imputation so ex-
tremely inconsistent with the cliaracter and
dignity of his order.— It is natural, as decent
men, that you should ; and I, therefore, will-
ingly second my Learned Friend in that part
oflus address. — I solemnly conjure you also
to give an impartial judgment— I call upon
you to convict or acauit, according to right and
justice.— God forbidf, that you should not I —
I ask no favour for my Client because he is a -
prelate, but I claim for him the risht of an
English subject, to vindicate his conduct under
the law of the land.

The Bishop, then, being in peaceable pos«
session, what is the conduct of the Prosecutor,
even upon his own confession P — He s^nds for
three men ; two of whom he calls domestics ;
one of them is his domestic blacktmith. — He
comes with them, and others to the office,
with piSTOxs, and provided with powdsb and
SHOT.— Now, quo animo did they^ come ?— I
was really so diverted with the nice distinc*
tion of Mr. Grindley, in his answer to this
question, that I could scarcely preserve mv
gravity. — He said, " I came, it is true, with
** pistols, and with powder and shot, to take
<' possession ; but-*mark— I did not load my
** pistols in order to take possession — I did not
*' load them Ull after I had it, and then only
*< to keep the possession I had peaceably taken.**
— This would be an admirable defence at the
Old Bailey. — A man breaks into my house in
the day, to rob me of my plate* — (this is but
too apt a quotation, for so I lost the whole of
it)— But this felon is a prudent man, and says
to himself— I will not toad my fire-arms till I
have got into the house and taken the plate,
andthenlanV/ load them, to defend myself
against the owner, if I am discovered.— This
is Mr. Grindley's law;— aiKl, therefore, the
moment he had forced the office, he loaded
his pistols, and called aloud repeatedly, that
he would blow out the brains of the fir^t man
that entered,— A pistol had before been held
to the breast of one of the Bishop's servants;
and things were in this posture when the Bi-
shop came to the spot, and w^s admitted inter
the office —The lock which he had affixed he
found taken off, the doors forced open, and
the apartment ocaipied by armed men, threat-'
ening* violence to ail who should oppose them.'
■ — — -^ » — ■* ' - -

* It seems Mr. Ersktne*&house in Serjeants'
Inn had been recently broken open, and bia
plate all stolen.

s L

6iyj 56 G60R6E in.

Triafi efthi Bukop qfBangmt

t51«

whether the Deputy Registrar, tbe Registrar
himself, or the highest man in the kin^om.

To come at once to the point: I maintain,
that, at the time tbe Bishop came to the
door, at which very moment Grindley waa
threatenine to shoot the first person that en-
tered, which made somebody say, '' Will you
shoot the Bishop P'' — I maintain, at that ver^
moment three indictable offences were com-
mitting, which put every man upon the level
of a magistrate, with regard to authority, and
even prescribed a duty to every man to sup*
press them. In the first there was ah aptrat ;
which my Friend did not define to you, but
which I will. — Mr. Serjeant Hawkins, trans-
cribing from the ancient authorities, and whosa
definition is confirmed by every day's prac-
tice, defines an afira;^ thus: '* It is an affray,
" though there is neither actual violence nor
" threat of violence, where a man arms hfm-
*' self with dangerous weapons in sucha man-
^'ner as will naturally cause terror;''-— ami
this was always an offence at common law,,
and prohibited by many statutes.

Let us measure Mr. Grindlev's conduct,,
upon his own account of it, by the standard
of this law, and examine whether he was
guilty of an affray. He certainly threatened
violence ; but I will throw him in that, as I
shall examine his threatening when I present
him to you in the character of a rioter.-^I
will suppose, then, that he threatened no vio-
lence; yet he was armed with daneerous wea-
pons in such a manner as would naturally
create terror.— He tells you, with an air of
triumph, that he brought the arms for that
express purpose, and that he dispersed those
who came to disturb him in his castle. He
was, therefore clearly guilty of an affray.

Let us next see what the law is, as it regards-
all the Kine's subjects, when an affray is com-
mitted. The same authorities say,— - (1 read
from Mr. Serjeant Hawkintf who coUeett tka
remit ef themj^ ** That any private man may
« stop and resist all persons en^ged in an
*' amy, and remove them ; that if he receive
^ a hurt in thus preserving the peace, he majF
'' maintain- an action for damages : and that^.
** it Ue unavoidably hurt any of tbe parties of-
** fending in doing that which the law both
** allows and commends, he may well justify
'^ it, for he is no ways' in fault."— -SettinK'
aside^ tiiereforei the office and anthonty or
the bishop, and the place- where it was com-
mitted^ and considering, him only as a privata^
subject, with no power of magistracy^ tie hna
. aright to do— not that which he dm (far i»

This is Me; Grinplet's owk AceouMT.—
He admits, that he had loaded his pistol before
the Bishop came ; tbat he had determined to
stand, vi et «rmic, to maintain possession by
violence, and by death if necessary ; and that
he had made that open declaration in the
hearins of tbe Bishop of the diocese.-— Per-
haps Mr. Grindley may wish, hereaAer, that
he had not made this declaration so public ;
lor, whatever may be the BUhop^t forbearance,
yet tbe criminal law may vet interpose by
other instruments, and by other means. — In-
deed, I am truly sorry to be discussing this
iqatter for a Defendant in July, which ought
to have been the accusation of a Fratecutor
six montht ago, if the public peace of the
realm had been duly vinaicated.

The.Bishop, then, being at the door, and
hearing his office was taken possession of by
force, and by the vei^ man whom he had dis-
placed, the question is. Did he do more than
the law warranted in that conjuncture? — I
maintain, that, from over forbearance, he did
much lets, — If in this scene of disorder the re-
cords of the diocese had been lost, mutilated,
er even displaced, the Bishop, if not legally,
would at the least have been morally respon-
mble. — It was his duty, besides, to command
decency within the precincts of his church,
and to remove at a distance from it all dis-
turbers of the peace. — And what, after all, did
the Bishop do ?— He walked up and down,'
remonstrating with the rioters, and desiring
them to go out, having before sent for a ma-
gistrate te act according to his discretion. — ^It
IS true, Mr. Grindley worked himself up to
say, that the Bishop held up his fist so [de-
ecrihing it] ; hut, with all his zeal, he will not
venture to swear he did so with a declaration,
or even with an appearance, of an intention
to strike him. The whole that he can screw
up his conscience to, is, to put the Bishop in
mn attitude, which is contradicted by every
one of his own witnesses— who all say, that
the Bishop seemed much surprised, and walk-
ed to and fro, saying, ** This is fine work !'* —
and moving his hands backwards and forwards
thus, [deeerihing it\ Does this account at
^1 correspond with Mr. Grindley 'sP or does
St prove an attitude of force, or even an ex-
pression of passion f Go the contrary, it ap-
pears to me tbe n^ost natural conduct in the
world. Hiey may fancy, perliaps, that they
expose the Bishop when they impute to him
the common feelings, or, if vou please, the in-
dignatwn ef a man. when all order is insulted
in his jM^sence, ana a shameless outrage com-
mitted in the venrjsaoctuary which he is call-i^bc/'Ae did nothingy^*h% had a right to re*
ed upon, by the duty of his effiee,and the dig- 1 move them by mam force, and to. call othefi^

Jeity of his station, to protect.— But is it re-
quired of any man, Either by humaa nature,
«r by human laws (^whatever may be the sanc-
tity of his charactei^, to look at soch a -pro-
eeeding unmoved? Would it have been
wrong, er indecent, if he had ^cn fobcxblt
aemoved them ? I sat , vs. was his dutt to

MAVB nOVB ftO^WBOEVBR. WBBBTltB OVBBVDBBS S

to assist in removing and securing them»
The Bishop, however, dki neither of thews
things;, he took a more regular ooorse^— he
sent for % magistrate to.preserre the peace—
he had, indeed, sent for him before ne caade-
himself;: yet th^ would have. you believe».
that he went there for an illegal purpose— *aa
-if any maa wha tBtended violen^^ ^jieiiiA

«17J

m»3 ofh€rs,/o/k Jttitf.

A. D. 1798.

[518

•Mttd for ft^viisiitmte ta witness the coromis*
aien uf It. When the magistrate came, Mr.
Grindley thought fit to behave a little more
•decently ; and so far was the bishop from
acting frith passion or resentment, that when
those abtwil him were desirous of interfering,
and offered their services to turn them out,
he said to them, ** No I let the law take its
'* coarse in due season.'*-— His Lordship, by
this answer showed a ereater regaro for
peace than recollection of the law ; for the
course of the law did warrant their forcible
removal; instead of which, he left the Pro-
aecntor, with arms in his hands, in a posses*
won, laken originally by force, and forcibly
maintained.

Let us next examine if the Prosecutor and
Ills witnesses, were eneaged in a xiot.— -My
Learned Friend will forgive me if I remind
bin, that there is one part of the legal defini-
tion of a riot, which he omitted.— 1 will,
therefore, supply the omission Irom the same
attlhoritias.-^*' A riot is, where three persons,
** or more, assemble together with an intent,
^ mutually to assist one another against any
^ who shall oppjase them in the execution of
'^ some enterprise of a private nature, and
** afterwatds actually execute the same in a
^* torbolent manner, to the terror of the
-^ ptople, whether the act intended be legal or
*' illegal." But the same authorities add very
pn>p^lir-«-<' It is clearly agreed, that in every
** riot there mast be some such circumstances,
-^ eiihier of actual force and violence, or of an
** apparent tending to strike teiror into the
^ people, because a riot must always be laid
^ in ttrrortm popa/i''— This most important
part of the definition of a riot, which my
Friend prudently omitted, points, directly and
conclusivelvi tipon the conduct of hi$ own
Client, and cddlpletel^ excludes mme.— The
Piosecotor, and his witnesses, <<i</ assemble
motus^lly to support one another, and executed
their purpose »i^A ormt m their Aandi, and with
ihr$tU$ and terror; which conclusively consti-
tutes a riot, whether he was Registrar, or not,
and whatever might be his right of posses-
sion.-^The Bishop, on the other band, though I
he might hate no right to remove the Prose*
cotor, nor any right to possession, could not
possibly be k rioter, for he came without vio'
ience or terror^ or the meant of either, and, if
be had employed them, might lawfully have
vsed thefn against those who were employing
bMb.

Let us now Airther'examine, whether I was
right In maintaining, that there w&s an
aggravation, firom the piece where the of^
fenc6 was committed, and which invested
the BIsbop with a distinct character and au-
thority.

Ay the statute of Edward the sixth, if ^r-
eiits^ tome tumultnously within the conse-
crated'predncts of the church, the Ordinary
hie not only a right to repress them, but h«
ntey exeommiinieate the offenders ; who are,
^mBes-,' liable tot sotere ahd ignomintous

tempord piutishment, after a conviction on
indictment, even for an indecent brawling
within the precincts of the church, without
any act at all, which would amount to a riot
oranafiray.

Let us then, for a moment, reflect, how
these solemn authorities, and any possible of^
fence in the Reverend Prelate, can possibly
be reconciled ; and let us contemplate, also,
the condition of England, if it be established
as a precedent upon the fact before you, that
he is amenable to criminal jurisdiction upon
this record. — A riot may arise in the street,
the moment afler your verdict is pronounced,
by persons determined to take and to main-
tain some possession by force. I may see or
hear armed men threatening death to all who
shall oppose them ; yet I should not venture
to interpose to restore the peace, because I
cannot try their titles, nor examine to which
of the contending parties the matter in con^
troversy may belong. — ^IFthis new doctrine is
to be established, ask yourselves this ques-
tion— Who will in future interfere to main-
tain that tranauillity, which the magistrate
may come too late to preserve, if the rein is
given to disorder in the beginning ? Although
dangerous violence niay be committing,
though public order may be trampled down
within his view, a wise man will keep here-
after within the walls of his own house.
Though fearless of danger to his person, he
may yet justly fear for his reputation, since,
if he only abks what is the matter, and inter-
poses his authority or counsel,' he may be put
by the rioters, into an attitude of defiance, *
and may be subjected to the expense and de-
gradation of a prosecution ! The delicate si-
tuation of the Bishop, at this moment crimi-
nally accused before you, is admitted ; but it
is hardly more. Gentlemen, than would at-
tach upon persons of manv other descriptions.
-; The same situation would not be much less
distressing to a Judge, to a Member of Par-
liament, or to any of you. Gentlemen, whom
I am addressing.— What would be the condi-
tion of the Public, or your own, if you .might
be thus dragged to the Assizes as rioters, by
the very rioters which your duty had driven '
you to ofiend ? I assert that society could not .
exist for an hour, if its laws were thus calcu-
lated to encourage its destroyers, and to pu- ,
nish it protectors.

Gentlemen, there is no man loves freedom
better than I do ; there is no man, I hope
who would more strenuously oppose himself
to proud and insolent domination in men ,
of authority, whether proceeding from minis-
ters of the church, or magistrates of the
8tate.-«-There is no roan, who would feel
less disposed to step beyond my absolutely
imposed duty as an advocate, to support
oppression, or to argue away the privi-
leges of an Englishroan.-I admit, that an
EngK^man's house is his castle; and I
reciSllect and recognize all the liberties he
ooghl to enjuy.— JMy Friend, and I, are not

U9]

86 GEORGE III.

Trial qftlu Bukop qf Bangor

isao

Irkelv lo differ, as to what an £ngli&hnuuQ*s
freedom consists in. The freedom that he
and I love and contend for, is the save. It
is a freedom that grows out of, and stands
firm upon, the i.AW*-it is a freedom which
r^sts upon the ancient institutions of our
wise forefathers— it is a freedom which
is not only consistent with, hut which cannot
exist without, public order and peace-<-and,
above all, it is a freedom cemented by morals,
and still more exalted by a reverence for reli-
gion, which is the parent of that charity, hu-
manity, and mild character, which has form-
ed, for ages, the glory of this country.

Gentlemen, my Learned Friend takes no-
lice, that this cause has been removed from
Us primitive tribunal, in order to be tried
before you at Shrewsbury. He tells you, he I
never saw the affidavit that was the founda-
tion of its removal; which, however, he with
great propriety supposes contained matter
which made it appear to Lord Kenyon to be
])is duty to withdraw the trial from its proper
forum m Wales.— But, he is instructed by
Mr. Grindlev to deny that any thing was
done, either by himself or any other person
connected with him, to prejudice that tribunal,
or the country which was to supply it. — I, on
the other hand, assert, thkt upon the prose-
cutor's cmn evidence, greater injustice and ma-
lice never marked any judicial proceeding. I
have in my hand a book (no matter by vrhom
written) circulated industriously tlirough all
Wales, to prejudice the public mind upon
the very question before you. But Mr. Grind-
le^, it seems, is not responsible for the acts of
this anonymous libeller — How far he is re-
sponsible, it is for YOU to iudge. It is for you
to settle, how it happened that the author of
this book should nave it in his power, mi-
nutely to narrate every circumstance which
Mr. Urindley has himself been swearing to ;
and that he should happen, besides, to paint
them in tbetvery same colours, ami to swell
them with the $ame exaggerations, with which
tlie^ have been this morning accumpanied.—
It will be for^ott to calculate the chances that
should bring mto the same book under invert-
ed commas, a long correspondence between the
Bishop of Bangor and this very person. — Gen-
tlemen, he admits, upon his oath, " that he
'< furnished the materials from whence that
'< part of the work, at least, might have
" Reached the author ;'' and from thence it
will be for you tp guess, what share he had
in the remainder.^ All I know is, that from
that time forward the Bishop's character has
been torn to pieces, not from this pamphlet
alone, but by a pestilential blast of libels, fol-
lowipe one another ; so that it has been im-
possible to read a newspaper, without having
announced to us this miserable cause, and the
inquiries forsooth to be instituted in parlia-
niept, which were to follow the decision. —
Gentlemen, the same spirit pursues the cause
rven into THisVLAC£,-^proceeding from the.
same talMled. source. — ^My friend tempers hi*

discourse with that decorum and respect foir
religion, which is inseparable from the lips of
so good a man.^-He tells you, that it has
been wittily said of the clersy, and his Client
desires him to add, <* truly too*' — that the
cler^ have found what Archimedes wished
for in vain^" a fulcrum, from whence to
*' move the world ,** he tells you, ** that it is
'' recorded of that great philosopher, that he
** desired but to have a fulcrum for his engine
^ to enable him to accomplish it.'*-—'' Church*
<' men," says Mr. Grindley. by the mouth of
Mr. Adam, who cannot abandon him, and
who, as a sort of set off against hi$ omn ho-
nour and moderation, is obliged to inhale the
spirit ofhis Client,'* The church," says Mr.
Urindley, ''has found this fulcrum in the
" other world, and it is by playing off that
"world, they enthral the world we live in.*'
He admits, indeed, that when they employ
their authority to enforce the true purposes of
religion, they have a right to that awful fol-
crum upon which their engine is placed, and
then their office will inspire reverence and
submission; but when tb^ make use of it
for the lowest and most violent purposes, for
ends destructive alike to religion ana civil so-
ciety ('r/caurM the purpo$e$ in queUifmU tbbit
it seems it is, that disgrace liot only fiuls upoa
its individuals, but destruction overtakes the
order.

My Learned Fiiend, by his Client's instnw*
tion, then immediately applies this general
reflection, and says, " that he can discover do
" other reason, why the bishop would no lon-
" ger permit Mr. Grindley to nokl tl^e office,
" than that he had deviated from his celestial
" course — had looked to the vile ana sordid
" affairs of the world, and prostituted the sa-
'' cred dignity of his character to purposes
" which would degrade men in the lowest si-
''tuations." — My Friend said, across the
Court, that he had never seen the pamphlel.
Good God ! I believe it — But J nave seen
it ; and I have no doubt that one half of it ia
copied into his brief: it is written in this very
spirit — it brings before the bishop the events
of France— it warns him of the fate of his
brethren in that country, as an awful lesson
to ecclesiastics of all ranks and denominar
lions, and remindif him, that 18 archbisbops»
118 bishops, 11,850 canons, 3000 superiors of
convents, and a revenue of fifteen miUions
sterling, were on a sudden swept away. [Mr.
Erskitiehere read an extract from the pamphiH
and then eontiuued : ]

Gentlemen, all this is mighty well ; but he
must be but lilUe acquainted with the cala-
mities of France, who believes that this was
the source of them. Jl ^^ ^fOBi t^meJk eotim
that tho^e horrors and calamities ardse^whicli
have disfigured and dishonoured her revolu-
tion, and which have clouded and . ohtcuied
the otherwise m^estic conrse of fnedom ;^-
horrors and calamitiea which hsyeHN^plB^ mi
alarm into niauy good men* aDd.fiJurnisbed a
pretext for many wiek|id 09««i in ouf ow«

591]

und others f for a Riot*

A. D. 1796.

[522

country. It was the profligacy and comiptioa
of the French state, and not tbe immorality
•f her cLzaoT, which produced that sudden
and extraordinary crisis, in the vortex of
which the church, and almost religion itself,
were swallowed up. The clergy of France
was pulled down, in the very manner of thi$
pamphlet, — A trumpet was blown against
their order — the Massacre of St. Bartholomew
was acted upon ihe stage, and the Cardinal of
Lorraine introduced upon it, exciting to mur-
der, in the robes of his sacred order.— It was
asked, by a most eloquent writer* (with whom
I do not agjree in many things, as I do in this)
whetlier this horrid spectacle was introduced
to inspire the French people with a iust hor-
xor of blood and persecution } — and he an-
swers the cfuestion himself by saying, that it
was to excite the indignation of the French
nation against r^lioion ahd its offices;
and that it had its effect: ^That by such
** means the Archbishop of Paris, a man only
^ known to his flock by his prayers and be-
** nedktions, and the extent of whose vast re-
^ venues could be best ascertained by his un-
** exampled charity to the unhappy, was to be
** hunted down like a wild beast, merely be-
** cause the Cardinal of Lorraine, in the six-
** teenth century, had been a rebel and a
•* murderer."

In the same manner, this pamphlet,
through the medium of abuse upon the Bi-
shop rf Banfor^ is obviously calculated to
abuse the mmds of the lower orders of the
people against theCHuacH*. and to destroy
the best consolation of human life, by bring-
ing the sanctions of religion into doubt and
disrepute. I am, myself; no member of the
church of England, nor do I know that my
Friend is — we were both born in another part
of the island, and educated in other forms of
worship ; but we respect the offices of religion
in whatever hands they are placed by the
laws of our country : and certainly the Eng-
lish clergy never stood higher than they do
to day, when Mr. Adam, so thoroughly ac-
nuainted with the history of his country, as
far as it is ancient, and who, from his personal
and professional connexions, is so perfectly
acquainted with all that passes in the world
of our own dav, is drawn back to the times of
Laud and Wolsev, to search for English pre-
lates, who have been a reproach to Uie order;
and when he would represent tyranny and op-
pression in churchmen, is forced back upon
an unreformed church, and to ages of dark-
ness ttid superstition, because it would have
been in vain to look for them under the sha-
dow of that mild religion which has promoted
such a spirit of humanity, and stamped such a
character upon our counUy, that i/ it should
ever, please God to permit her to be agitated
like neighbouring natioikS^ the happy differ-
ence would be seen between men wno rever-
itnce religion, and those who set out with des-

• Mr. Burke,

troying it.— The Bishops, besides (to do them
common justice), are certainly the last of the
clergy that should be attacked. — ^The indul-
gent spirit of reformed Christianity, recollect*
log that, though invested with a ddvine office,
they are men with human passions and affec-
tions, permits them to mix in all the custom-
ary indulgences, which, without corrupting
our morals, constitute much of the comfort
and happiness of our lives ; yet, they in a
manner separate themselves from their own
families; and, whilst the other orders of the
clersy, even the most dignified, enjoy (with-
out oeing condemned for it) the amusements
which taste and refinement spread before us,
no bishop is found within these hatmts of
dissipation.-— So far from subjecting them-
selves to be brought to the assizes for riot and
disorder, they thus refiuemany of the harmless
gratificationiy which, perhaps, rather give a
grace and ornament to virtue, than disfigure
the character of a Christian ; and I am suro
the Reverend Prelate, whom I represent has
never overstepped those limits, which a deco-
rum, perhaps overstrained, has by custom
imposed upon tbe whole order. The Bishop's
individual character, like every other man's
must be gathered from his life, which, I have
alwaysunderstood. has beeu eminently useful
and virtuous. I know he is connected with
those, whose lives are both ; and who must
be suffering distress at this moment from
these proceedings. He is nearly allied to one*
whose extraordinary knowledge enables him
to fulfil the duties of a warm benevolence, in
restoring health to the sick, and in bringinjg
together with it hope and consolation to fami-
lies in the bitterness of affliction and distress,
— I have, more than once, received that bles-
sine at his hands, which has added not a
little to the anxiety which I now feel.

Gentlemen, I am instructed, and indeed
pressed, by the anxiety of the Bishop's friends^
to call many witnesses, to show that he was
by no means disturbed with passion, as has
been represented, and that, so far firom it, he
even repressed those, whose zeal for order,
and whose affection for his person, prompted
them to interfere ; saying to them, " The law
^ will interpose in due season." I have wit-
nesses, to a great number, whom I am pres-
sed to call before you, who would contiadict
Mr. Grindley in the most material parts of
his testimony ; but then I feel the advantage
he would derive from this unnecessary coursej;
he would have an opportunity from it, to de-
prive the Reverend Prelate of the testimony
and protection of your approbation. He
would say. no doubt^ ** Oh, I made out the
'' case which vindicated my Prosecution,
** though it was afterwards overturned by the
" testimony of persons in the bishop's suite,
'^ and implicitly devoted to his service ; — I
** laid facts before the jurv^ from which a
"conviction must have followed^ and lam

* The celebrated Dr. Richard Warien. .

SfS]

S6 GEORGE IIL

^^not responsible for the falad glosses by
** which hi$ wUnettei have perverttd tkem*^*-^
This would be the language of the prosecutor ;
and I am, therefore, extremely anxious that
your verdict should proceed upon the facU as
they nam itand before the Courts and that you
should repel, with indignation, a charge which
is defeated by the very evidence that has been

aiven to support it. — I cannot, besides endure
ie humiliation of fighting with a shadow,

and the imprudence of giving importance, to you.

Triid qfthe Bishop of Bangor [5ft

the use of this room to transact his business
there ; that the defendants, intending to dis-
turb him in his office, riotously assembled to
disturb the peace, and broke and entered ibm
office room, and continued there, making a
great disturbance, asserting that he had as*
sumed an office which did not belong to him,
and making a riot there. These thioj^s must
be proved to your satisfaction. — I will com-
meni upon the evidence &s I shall state it to

what I hold to be nothingy by putting any
thin^ in the scale against it ; a conduct whicn
would amount to a confession that tomething
h^ been proved which demanded an answer.
How fat those, firom whom my instructions
come, may think me warranted in pursuing
this course, I do not know ; but the decision
of that question will not rest with either of us,
if your good sense and consciences should, as
I am persuaded thegr will, give an immediate
and seasonable sanction to this conclusion of
tfaeUial.

[Mr. Erskine, after consulting a few mi-
nutes with Mr. Plumer, Mr. Leycester,
and Mr. Mi lies, informed the Court he
iliould give no evidence.]

Summing vp.

Mr. JusUce Heel&.---Gentlemen of the
Jurvj^This is an indictment against the
Bbhop of Bangor, Hugh Owen, John Ro-
. berts, John Williaras, and Thomas Jones.
The indictment states, « That Sahiuel Grind-
1^'' (who, it se^ns, is the prosecutor of this
kidictment), ** on the 8th of January last, was
deputy registrar of the episcopal and consis-
torial couf t of the bishop of Bangor, and that^
in right of his office, he bad the use of a: room
adjoining to the cathedral church of Bangor,
duled the rcaistrtur's office^ for transacting the
business of nis office: that the defendants^
intending to disturb the prosecutor in theexe*
cution ofhis office of deputy registrar, on the
8th of January last, riotously assembled and
uDktwfully broke the registrat's office, and
itmtaaed there for aa mar, and continued
making a great disturbance, and assaulted
the prosecutor &nd stirred up a riot.'*

Samuel Grindley, the prosecutor, tells you,
that in February 1793, he was appointed
agent to the bishop of Bansor, and that he af*
terwards held the office of deputy registrar,
under Mr. Gunning, who, it seems was a
minor ; that he saw Mr. Gunning the regis-
trar, in October 1704; that he paid seventy
pounds a year to the bishop, on account of
Mr. Gunning his principal ; that the bishop
was the person who made the bargaiti be-
tween him and his principal ; that he entered*
on hi^ office as deputy.— He says, that he was
invited by the bishop, and that the hitbop in-'
troduced him (the prosecutor) to Mr. Gunning
as the principal registrar, and introduced the
principal registrar to the witness as his de^
puty. — He says, that there was no complainf '
thai he had not dischar^ the duties of his '
office; and that he continued to discharge the*
dutiesof his office till the SSnd of February last,
lie says, that there is an apartment belongs
iag to this office, which, it seems, is under -
the chapter-house adjoining to the cathedral ;
that there is a flight of steps going up to it-—
that he emplovs his clerks in the office, and
he has a resident clerk there.«~He says, he
told the bishop that he would resign on tha
29nd of February last ; that on the 4th of Ja-
nuaiy he was absent from Bangor, and ro-
turned on the 7th, having received infi>rma* •
tioQ that his office had heen broken open;
that the bishop afterwards acknowledged to
him, that it had been broken open by bis (the •
bishop's) servants^ under his direct]on.-*Ha
says, that some panes of glass had been taken^
down, the leads had been removed, and fresh
locks had been put upon the doors. Ail ti)is
the bishop aGkBowledged.«*-And then heg[ives
you an account of his coming there; ot his
Tnis Gentlemen, is the substance of the breaking opes the door, and his entering

ind]ctment.-^The definition of a riot has been
truly stated to you; it may be collected indeed
from the indictment itself; and is, when two
or more persons assemble together with an
int&it mutually to asstsi each other, and to
resist all those who should oppose them, and

agam.
Let us consider, so far as this, how it ap-

{>lies. In the first place it certainly does not
ie in the mouth of the bishop to say, that
this man was not properly appointed to his
Office; he was in the exercise of his offiee;
with a tether intent to break' the peace*^and I he had made aa agireement with his princi^
ills likewise for a private purpose. add he psid him seventy pounds a year-^tho

, Kow, before I sum up the evidence, I shall bishop was the perum who negoliated tho
state those things particnlarly,- to which you business ; and he gave the bishop notice that
should direct your attention ; and you will he meant to give up his office on the S3nd of
consider how the evidence aophes in sapport February; biE yon see, between the oth and
of the indictment. It must be prOved to yom* the 7 th of January, before the time the
satisfaction, that the prosecutor is deputy re- prosecutor had appointed for lesigning. ids
gistrar of this consistorial court of the bishop office the bishop-thought proper to go- to Iho
of Battgor ; tbai^ io r%ht of that oAoe^ he had office and break open the lock/aod Uien» it »

I •

SS51

ntd othertfjbr a Riei.

A. D. 1796.

t«S

conteiuled, on the part of the Defendants,
thai the bishop was in peaceable possession ;
it IS contended too, that, as bishop, he had a
jurisdiction in this cathedral — that, because
the deputy registrar must be confirmed by the
bishop, the prosecutor is only tenant at will
to the bishop; that he never had a legal ap-
pointment, and, therefore, the bishop bad the
power of dbmissing him.

Mow, in the firsts place, supposing it to be
proved, that the bishop had a power of dis-
missing him (which dues not appear one way
or the other), it does not follow from thence,
that he ought to do it by force or violence—
lie ought to dn it by process of law. It hap-
^ns in this country that the lords chief jus-
tices of the courts of King's-bench and Com-
moD pleas have a right oiappointing officers ;
the judges attending the court at the Old
Bailey, have a right of appointing the officers
there— and onestions have frec^uently arisen
coBceroine ttiis power of appomtmcnt, whe-
ther rightfully or wrongfully exercised. What
is the mode of deciding it ? Each part^ ap-
^iDts his officer, and then one brings his ac-
tion, and it is determined by due course of law.
*— If the bishop had a right of dispossessing this
man, which does not appear to me, because,
though the appointment of a deputy might
not he ^ood without the approbation of the
bishop, It does not follow from thence that the
bishop had a right to withdraw that approba-
tion and that confirmation, after it was given.
Whether he can, or cannot, is a question I am
iiot prepared to decide, and it is immaterial to
the present question ; it is enough to say that
if the bishop had that right and that power,
it behoved him to have caused Mr. Gunning
to have appointed another deputy, and then
tbat deputy ought to have tried the right.—
The question then is, was the bishop in peace-
mblepoasession? No man it in peaceable pos^
weuitmpf any place which he comet to by force
and violence ; the bishop exercised force and
violence in ihit respect, in breaking the lock,
sod in putting on a new lock ; therefore, the
force and violence was on the part of the bi-
shop ; — he was never in peaceable possession
of this place, nor could he have a right to
come and put this lock upon the door.

Let us pursue this matter by steps. — ^The
prosecutor said, he came armed with pistols ;
tluit was, I think, improper ; he ought not to
liave armed himseli with pistols in that
fa8hioD.*-He broke open the lock, and he
entered ; that was not improper ; he being in
pofisessioD of this office, it was lawful for him
to do so. — Then it seems, a Mr. Rasbrook
came^ who is a person exercising some office
under the bishop, his house- steward, I think;
be came, and the prosecutor presented a pistol
to hira — ^tbat was bijghly improper. A man
has a ri^ht to arm himself,, and assemble his
friends m defence of his house ; but the law
allows no more; because the house is his
sanctuary, he is not to arm himself, and as-
semblabiB frieads in defence of bis closer but

ou^ht to have recourse to legal means, if he
is iniured; and, therefore, the prosecutor cer*
taioly acted with a greater degree of force and
violence, in that respect, thaji he ought to have
done. But then that was no legal excuse for the
bishop's coming afterwards in the manner be
did. The prosecutor's presenting a pistol to
Rasbrook, could be no inducement to the
bishop, and the other defendants, because
they were not present, and their passions
were not provoked by it.

The bishop, in this case, gentlemen, seems
to have laboured certainly under two very
great errors. — First of all, that he had a rifht
to remove the prosecutor ; and secondly, that
he had a right to remove him hy force and vio"
lenee. — ^Then these persons were removed out
of the office ; the outer door was secured, bj
some means, by the prosecutor, and the several
persons with him. — It is said that tiey were
guilty of a riot. I think certainly they were
guilty of no riot at thittUne ; they were guilty
of a misdemeanor in arming themselves, but
they stood merely upon the defensive.-->No
person, as I told vou before, is justified in arm-
mg himself and his servants to defend ^s
close; but if he does arm himself and his ser-
vants to defend his close, and opposes no m--
son without the close, then be is guilty or m>
riot whatever.

The guestioa is, whether or ik> they are
guilty of such a breach of the peace — of an
att of so much force and violence, as to con-
stitute a riot <— When there was a knocking
at. the door, the prosecutor said he would
shoot any one who should enter ; which, I
said before, he was not warranted in doing.
Being told the bishop was there, be said he
would treat him with all possible respect, and
be opened the door, and admitted him and his
followers ; and then, he says^ he loaded ano-
ther pistols — He tells you, tkie bishop entered
in a great rage. Whether there was any rage-
or passion, or no, is only material to show
whether or no the rest of the story is proba*
ble ; because, his beinjg in a ra^e, does not
prove him guilty of a breach ot the peace.
The question is, whether he has committed
any acts in^breach of the peace ?-— First of all,,
the prosecutor tolls you, that he told the bi-
shop he should behave with proper respect to
him, but he should not leave tne office*— he
swears that the bishop took hold of him ; and
afterwards be went to William Roberts, aa
hftsbandman belonging to the witness— he
then went to another servant, Robert Davis,
and attempted to pull him out; that the hu
shop returned to William Roberts, coHared
him, and drew hjm towards the doof; that
the bishop went with his hands clenched
towards tne witness; and the witness de-
scribes the manner in which he (the bishop)
went towanls him.— Now, his taking hold of
the witness is an assault. — He says, he at-
tempted to pull him out ; his seizing hold of
him IS AK ASSAULT ; his returning to William
Roberts^ and collaring him, and pushing bins

5«75

S6 6B0RGE IH.

TriiU qftht BiAop rf'Bmgar.

[SCS

towards the dbor, is ahother assault: his
^ing with his hands clenched towards him
m a menacing way, if he were near enough to
atrike him> would be an assault; if not near
enough to strike him, it would not be an as-
sault: and then he called to his servants to
come and pull him out — that is a breach of
the peace, coming and removing them all by
force and violence.

Then there is that which passes in respect
to Mr. Roberts. The prosecutor and the
other witnesses tell you, that Roberts was in a
great rage ; he cannot say whether he entered
Eefore or after the orders given by the bishop ;
that he clenched his fist, and said, " if no-
body will turn him (meaning the prosecutor)
out, I will do it.*' — Tne bishop said the prose-
cutor had pistols: upon which Roberts said,
in. an outrageous manner, '< do not shoot the
bishop, shoot me ;" and said, that if nobodv
else would turn the prosecutor out, he would.
— ^He asked the prosecutor to go on one side
with him, into the church-yard, and said, he
was not afraid of him^n any place. The wit-
ness said, he had something else to attend to;
and another of the witnesses said, he promised
to meet him at some other time and place.
This is, you see, a challenge by Roberts to
fight the prosecutor ; why, tnat is a breach of
the peace. The bishop is present ; he is the
person who tells Roberts that the prosecutor
nad pistols ; then the bishop hears this chal-
lenge. They all came upon one design.
When several persons come upon an illegal
desijgn or purpose, the act of one, especially if
in the presence of all, is the act of all.

This, gentlemen, is the sum of the evidence
on the ofie Mt ; and there is no evidence on
the of Aer.

The bishop, no doubt, is a man of an excel-
lent character; but at this moment he gave
way to his temper. He ought to have fol-
lowed the process of the law, and not so to
have done. Thus much I have said affects
the bishop, and affects Roberts. As to Owen,
the prosecutor says that Owen came into the
office ; he made a noise : he talked very loud.
The witness told him if he had any business,
he was there ready to transact it, otherwise
he begged they would go about their business.
He only speaks to his making a noise. John
Williams, he says, was less noisy than the
rest. The witness asked what business he
had there; and told him to go about his busi-
ness. He says he staid there against his will :
be staid after the rest went away.

Upon this it is necessary for me to state,
•s I did before, that the other defendants i
comiag with the bishop upon the same de- 1

sign, by force and violence, to dispiossess the
prosecutor, undoubtedly they came with an
unlawful intent and purpose ; and if you be-
lieve these witnesses, they were guiltv of the.
several breaches of the peace which I have
stated, in assaulting the prosecutor, in assault*
ing; David Roberts, in assaulting William
Roberts, and in the defendant Roberts chal-
lenging the prosecutor; if you believe these
witnesses, it seems to me tliat the defendants
are guilty of the riot with which they stand
charged. As for the force and violence which
the prosecutor made use of, all that may be
urged in another place in mitigation of the
punishment ; it is only for you to determine
whether they, or each of them, are guilty of
this riot.

Mr. £r«A:in£. — ^The two last witnesses stated
a direct contradiction.

Mr. Justice Heath. — The law is clear and
plain; you will apply the law to the facts as
I have stated them. You will banish all pre-
judices that you may have from all miblica-
lions. It is, indeed, unnecessarv to aamonish
gentlemen of your enlij^htened understand*
mes : but at the same time, considering that
individuals are to be tried by the law of the
land, if they are guilty, notwithstanding the
high character thejr may deservedly nave,
dowii to this time, it is yourduty to find them
guilty. If you have any reasonable doubt
whether they are gmlty, — in that case you
will acquit the defendants.

In about five minutes the Juiy acquitted all
the defendants.*

* The exemplary morals and decorum
which have so long, to the honour of this
country, distinguished the high dignitaries of
her national church, bestowed upon the tiial
of the right reverend prelate, who was the
principal object of it, an extraordinary degree
of curiosity and interest. Indeed, from a pe-
rusal of the whole proceedings, we cannot
help thinking, that the prosecutor might per-
haps have been influenced by the expectation
that any compromise would have been pre-
ferred by the defendant and his friends, to
even a public discussion of such an extraordi-
naiy accusation as that of a riot and assault
by an Eoslish bishop, assisted by other cler-
gymen ofhis diocese, within the very pre-
cincts of his own cathedral. The reverend
prelate, however, was not to be intimidated.
— He pleaded not eiuHy to the indictment,
and received the clear acquittal of a jury
of his countrymen.''— JScfitor qf £n&iijc*a
SpeecAet.

529]

Trial of John Reeves, Esg.Jbr a Libel. A. D* 1796.

C530

619, Proceedings on the Trial of an Information exhibited Ex-
Officio by his Majesty's Attorney General (in pursuance
of an Address presented to his Majesty by the House of
Commons) against John Reeves, Esquire, for a Seditious
Libel ; tried at Guildhall, by a Special Jury, before the
Right Hon. Lloyd Lord Kenyon, Lord Chief Justice of
the Court of King s-Bench, May 20th : 36 George IIL
A,D. 1796*

{The parliamentary proceedings relating to
thiii case are fully reported in the New
Parliamentary History, Vol. 89, pp. 608
H teq, : It is therefore thought imneces-
sary here to repeat them.]

Infokmatioh.

Of Hilary Term in the fhirtf-sixth year of
King George the third.

London > Be it remembered that sir John
to wit, > Scott knight attorney general of our
lord the now kine who prosecutes in this be-
half for our said lord the king comes into the
court of our said lord the king before the
king himself at Westminster on Saturday
next after the octave of Saint Hilary in this
same term and for our said lord the king
^veth the court here to understand and be
informed that Johs Reeves late of Westmin-
ster in the county of Middlesex esquire being
a malicious seditious and ill-disposed person
and greatly disaffected to the government of
this realm and unlawfully and maliciously de-
vising and intending to raise and exctte^ealou^
sies and divisions among the liege subjects of
our said lord the king and to alienate the af-
fections of Uie liege subjects of our said lord
the king from the government by King Lords
and Commons now dulv and happily estab-
Ibhed by law in this realm and to destroy and
subvert the true principles of the free con-
stitution of the government of this realm and
most artfully and maliciously to traduce vilify
and bring into contempt the nower and dig-
nity of the two houses of parliament of this
realm and with intent to cause it to be believ-
ed that the regal power and government of
thu realm might consistently with the free-
dom of this realm as bylaw declared and es-
tablished be carried on in all its functions by
the king of this realm although the offices
duties and functions of the lords spiritual and
temporal and Commons of this realm in par-

* Now first publtshod from a report taken
hi short-hand by Joseph Gumey, which has
been obligingly communicated to mt by Mr.
Beeves.

VOL. XXVI.

Hament assembled should be suppressed and
abolished on the twenty-ninth day of Octo-
ber in the thirty sixth year of the reign of
our said present sovereign lord George the
third now king of Great Britain &c« at
London to wit at the parish of Saint Mary lo
Bow in the ward of Cheap in London afore-
said unlawfully maliciously and seditiously
did print and publish and cause to be printed
and publishecl a certain scandalous malicious
and seditious libel containing therein among
other things divers scandalous malicious and
seditious matters of and concerning the king
and thejgovernraent of this realm and of and
concernmg the two houses of parliament of
this realm according to the tenor and effect
following that is to say With the exception,
tftereforCf of the advice and content of the two
Houtes of Parliament (meaning the parlia-
ment of this kingdom), and the iwterpontion of
juries ; the government (meaning the eovern •
ment of this kingdom), and the admimttration
of it in all ittparttf may he said to rest wholly
and solely on the king (^meaning the king of
this realm), and those appointed by himj those
two adjuncts of parliament (meanmg the par-
liament of this realm) and juries are subsi*
diary and occasional ; but the king's power
(meaning the power of the king of this realm)
is a substantvce one, always visible and active.
By his officers^ and in his name, every thing is
transacted that relates to the peace of the
realm and the protection of the subject. The
subject feels thiSf and acknowledges with thank'
fulness a mperintending sovereignty^ which
alone is congenial with the sentiments and
temper of Englishmen. Injine, the government
of England is a monarchy; the monarch is
the ancient stock from which l^ave sprung those
goodly branches of the legislature^ the Lords
and CommonSf^hat at the same time give oma^
ment to the tree, and afford shelter to those who
seek protection under it. But these are still
only branches, and derive their origin and their
nutriment from their common parent ; they may
be lopped off] and the tree is a tree still; shorn i n-
deeaaf its honours, but not, like them, cast into
the fire. The kingly gaternment may go on, in
allitsfunctions^without Lords or Commons: it has
heretofore done sof or years together ^ and in our
t M

531] 3fi GEORGE III. Trial of John Heeva, Esq.Jbr a Libel [639

times it doei so during every recess (f parliament ;
but without the king his parliament is no more.
The kiAgt therejbre^ alone it is who necessarily
subsists icithout change or diminution, and from
him alone tceu nceastngly derive the protection
of law and government. In cootempt of our
said lord the king and of the parliament and
laws of this realm To the evil example of all
others in the like case offending and against
the peace of our said Iprd the kmg his crown
and digniW And the said attorney general
of our said lord the king for our said lord
the king further gives the court here to un-
derstand and be informed that the said John
Hef.ves so being such person as aforesaid and
unlawfully and maliciously devising and in-
tending to raise and excite jealousies and
divisions among the liege subjects of
our said lord the king and to alienate the
affections of the liege subjects of our said
lord the king from the government by King
Lords and Commons now duly and hapoily
established by law in this realm and to aes-
troy and subvert the true principles of the
free constitution of the government of this
realm and most artfully and maliciously to
traduce vilify and brine into contempt the
power and dignity of the two houses of par-
liament of this realm and with intent to cause
it to be believed that the regal power and
government of this realm migl)t consistently
with the freedom of this realm as by law de-
clared and established be carried on in all its
functions by the king of this realm although
the Lords spiritual and temporal and Com-
mons of this realm should in future never be
assembled in parliament on the same daj
and year aforesaid at London aforesaid to wit
at the parish and ward aforesaid in London
aforesaid unlawfully maliciously and sedi-
tiously did print and publish and cause to
be pnnted and published a certain other
scandalous malicious and seditious libel con-
taining therein among other things divers
scandalous malicious and seditious matters of
and concerning the kin^ and the government
of this realm and of and concerning the two
Houses of Parliament of this realm according
to the tenor and effect following that is to say
With the exception, therefore, of the advice and
consent of the two houses of parliament (mean-
ing the parliament of this kingdom), and the
interposition of juries ; the government (meaning
the government of this kingdom), and the ad--
ministration of it in all its parts, may be said
to rest wholly and solely on the king (meaning
the kinc of this realm), and those appointed by
him. Those two adjuncts of parliament (mean-
ing the parliament of this realfb) and juries
are subsidiary and occasional ; but the king's
power f meaning the power of the king of this
realm) is a substantive one, always visible and
active. By his officers, and in his name, every thing
is transacted that relates to the peace oftherealm^
and the protection of the subject. The subfect
feels this, and acknowledges with thankfulness
o tuperintending sovereignty which is ahnt con-'

genial with the sentiments and temper of En'
glishmen. In fine, the government of England
is a monarchy ; the monarch is the anctent
stock from which have sprung those goodly
branches of the legislature, the Lords and Com^
mons, that at the same time give ornament to the
tree and afford shelter to those who seek pro-
tection under it. But these are stillonly branches,
and derive their origin and their nutriment
from their common parent; they may be lopped
off, and the tree is a tree still ; shorn indeed of its
honours, but not, like them, cast into the fire. The
kingly government may go on, in all Us func-
tions,without Lordsor Commons ; Uhasherettfort
done so for years together, and in our times it does
so during every recess of parliament ; but wit/iout
the king his parliament is no more. The king,
therefore, alone it is who necessarily subsists
without change or diminution, and from lum
alone we unceasingly derive the protection of
law and government. In contempt of our said
lord the king and of the parliament and laws
of. this realm to the evil example of all others
in the like case ofiPending and against the
peace of our said lord the king his crown and
dignity Abd the said attorney general of
our said lord the king for our said lord the
king further gives the court here to under-
stand and be informed that the said Jobv
Reeves so being such person as aforesaid and
unlawfully and maliciously devising and in*
tending to raise and excite jealousies and di«
visions among the liege subjects of our said
lord the king and to alienate the afiectioos of
the liege subjects of our said lord the king
from the government by King Lords ana
Commons now duly and happily established
by law in this realm and to destroy and sub-
vert the true principles of the free constitu*
tionof the government of this realm and
most artfully and malkiously to traduce viKfj
and brine into contempt the power and dig«
nity of the two bouses of parliament of this
realm and with intent to cause it to be be*
lieved that the holding of parliamenti is not
essential to the exercise according to the
freedom of this realm of any of the func«
tions of the king of this realm in the go*
vernment thereof on the same day and year
aforesaid at London aforesaid -to wit at the
parish and ward aforesaid in London afore*
said unlawfully maliciously and seditiouslT
did print and publish and cause to be printed
and published a certain other scandalous ma*
iicious and seditious libel containing therein
among other things divers scandalous niali*
cious and seditious matters of and concern*
ing the king and the ^vernment of this realm
and of and concerning the two Houses of Par*
liament of this realm according to the tenor
and effect following that is to say With tha
exception, therefore, of the advice and consetst of
the too Houses of Parliament (meaaxingihe par-
liament of this kingdom), and tke inlerpositioa
of juries: thesovemment (meaning the |^vomr
ment of this Kingdom), and the adminutrsdioH
ofil in all its parts, may be said to rest wkol^f

li

6331

6n the TinsUsh Ci/ustitution.

A. D. 1796.

Md mklff on tht *in^(mcaning thekine of this
realm), and those appointed 6y him. Those two
^ttnt^t cf' parliament (meaningthe parliament
of this realm) and juries are subsidiary and oc-
tational; fmt the kin^*s power (meaning the pow-
er of the king of this realm) is £<n<6«fanhrc one,
mbmays vitibie and active. By his officers^ and in
kit name, eter^ thing is transacted that relates
to the peace of the realm and the protection of
ike mbject. The subject feels this, and acknow-
ledges with thankfulness a superintending sove-
reignty, which alone is congenial with the senti-
**^*artrf tetnper of Englishmen. In fine, the
government of England is a monarcht/ ; the mo-
narch IS the ancient stock from which have
sprung those goodly branches of the legislature,
the lardi and Commons, that at the same time
give amament to the tree, and afford shelter
to those who seek protection under it. But these
are still only branchet, and derive their origin
dnd their nutriment from their common parent ;
they may be lopped off and the tree is a tree
etitl ; ^wm indeed of its honours, but not, like
them, eatt into the fire ; the kingly government
may go on, in all its Junctions, without Lords or
Canmoiu : tt has heretofore done so for years to*
gether ; and in our times it does so iuring every
recess of parliament ; bfit without the king his
parliament is no more. The king, thertfore,
alone it is who necessbrily subsists without
change or diminution, and from him alone we
nneeatingly derive the protection of law and go-
vernment In contempt of our said lord the
king and of the parliameQt and laws of this
reaim To the evil example of all others in
the like case offending and against the peace
of our said lord the kmg his crown and dig-
nity And the said attomey-eeneral of our
said lord the king fcir our saiJ lord the king
further gives the Court here to understand and
be informed that the said Joun Reeves so be-
ing such person as aforesaid and unlawfully
and maliciously devising and intending to
raise and excite jealousies and divisions among
the liege subjects of our said lord the king
and to alienate the affections of the liege
.subjects of our said lord the king from
the government by Kins; Lords and Com-
mons now duly and happily established by law
in this realm and to destroy and subvert the
true principles of the free constitution of the
government of this realm and most artfully
and maliciously to traduce vilify and bring
into contempt the power and dignity of the
two Houses of Parliament of this realm on
the same day and year aforesaid at Lon-
don aforesaid to wit at the narish and ward
aforesaid in London afoiesaia unlawfully ma.
Bdously and seditiously did print and publish
and cause to be printed and published a cer-
tion other scandalous malicious and seditious
Kbel containing therein among other things
divers scandalous malicious and seditious mat-
ters of and concerning the king and the go-
Tenkment of this realm and of and concern-
kigthe two Houses of Parliament ot this realm
according to the tenor and effect following tliat

[534

is to say With the exception, therefore, of the
advice and consent of the two Houses of Farlia*'
meat (meaning the parliament of this king*
dom),andthe interpositionof juries ; the govern"
ment (meaning the government of this king*
dom), and the administration of it in all its parts,
mtty be said to rest wholly and solely on the king
(meaning the king of this realm), and those
appointed by him. fhose two adjuncts ofparliu"
ment (meaning the parliament of this realm)
and juries are subsidiary atid occasional; but the
king*s power (meaning the power of the king
of this realm) is a substantive one, always visi-
ble and active. By his officers, and in his name, -
every thing is transacted that relates to the
peace of the reahn and the protection ofthesub*
ject. The subject feels this, and acknowledges
with thankfulness a superintending sovereignty,
which alone is congenial with the sentiments
and temper of Englishmen. In fine, the go*
vemment of England is a monarchy ; the mom
fiarch is the ancient stock from which have
sprung those goodly branches of the legislature,
the Lords and Commons, that at the same time
give ornament to the tree, and afford shelter to
those who seek protection under U. But these
are still only branches, and derive their origin
and their nutriment from their common parent /
they may be lopped off, and the tree is a tree still;
shorn indeed of its honours, but not, like them,
cast into the fire. The kingly government may
go on, in all its functions, without Lords or
Commons : it has heretofore done so for years to-
gether, and in our times it does so during every
recess of parliament ; but without the king his
parliament is no more. The king therefore alone
it is wlu) necessarily subsists without change or
diminution ; and from him alone we unceasingly
derive the protection of law and government In
contempt of our said lord the king and of the
parliament and laws of this reahn To the
evil example of all others in the like case of*
fending and against the peace of our said lord
the kiti^ his crown and dignity Whereupoic
the saiclaltorney general of our said lord the
king who fur our said lord the kins in this be-
hall prosccuteth for our said lord the king
prayelh the consideration of the Court here
m the premises and that due process of law
may be awarded against him the said John
Reeves in this behalf to make him answer to
our said lord the king touching and concern*
ing the premises aforesaid.'

The information was opened by Mr. Ab-
bott [afterwards Ix)rd Chief Justice of the
court of King's Bench.]

Mr. Attorney General [Sir John Scott, af-
terwards Loira Chancellor Eldon] : — May it
please your Lordship; — Gentlemen of tlie
Jury ; I have the honour this day to attend
you in obedience to a command which I h.ive
received from his majesty, and which he has
been pleased to give me in consequence of an
address which the House of Commons of this
country thought proper to present to hhn,
that he would orueriiis attorney general to

635J 86 GEORGE III. Trial of John Reeva, Esq.Jbr a Libel [530

I prosecute the present defendant for the pub<
icatioD of a pamphlet, which that Hou&e had
resolved to be, ** a malicious, scandalous, and
seditious libel, containing matter tending to
create jealousies and divisions amongst his
majesty's loyal subjects, to alienate their af-
fections from our present happy form of go-
vernment as established in Kmg, Lords, and
Commons, and to subvert the true principles
of our free constitution." The House of
Commons resolved farther, that this pamphlet
was a high breachqf the privileges of that Hou$e,
Having come to that determination it was un-
doubtedly within their province to proceed to
take such steps by way of animadversion upon
the author as the justice of the case might
seem to require from them ; the mode how-
ever which they adopted for the purpose of
vindicating the constitution of the country
against this pamphlet, thus voted by them to
be a malicious scandalous and seditious libel,
was, to submit the question whether it be
a malicious scandalous and seditious libel,
to the decision of a juiy of the coimtry ;
that if they found it so to be, that punishment
might follow which may be due to the author
of the book.

Gentlemen, I have no difficulty in stating
to my lord and you, that in my place in the
House of Commons I took no part in the de-
bate or -the division upon this subject ; be-
cause that debate having a tendency to de-
cide, either that I should or should not dis-
charge the duty which it is incumbent upon
me this day to discharge, it appeared to me at
least that I should act with more propriety if
I abstained from giving any opinion upon the
work,, than if I either promoted or prejudiced
that prosecution which it roieht become my
duty to institute. But, at the same time, I
did state that which I shall likewise take the
liberty of stating to you : I humbly submitted
to the attention of the House,* the principle
upon which I hope I have always conducted
prosecutions in matters of libel — the principle
upon which, as far as my own judgment can
lead me, it is my determination in future al-
ways to conduct Siich prosecutions ; — and that
principle which, as I had applied it to all those
cases m which I had heretofore been concern-
ed I meant to apply to all those in which I
may hereafter take a part is the principle
upon which I mean to act this day. I stated
to the House, gentlemen, that the question
which I was always desirous to put to a jury

was, VVu ETHER TBE DEFEKDAKT PUBLISBEO
THE BOOR WITU THE CRIMINAL INTENTION
CHAKOED IN THE INDICTMENT. That I haVO

always thought to be my duty, and I shall
ever act upon it as my duty until I am cor-
rected by the wisdom which ought to direct
me in cases of this sort. I have always
thought it my duty to call the attention of the
jury to the whole of the publication; to state
to them, that in ray humble opinion, it was

♦ Soe the New Pa^l. Hist, ▼oj.32, p. 634.

their duty to consider tb« work from the bo-
ginning to the end of it, to take every Dart of
It as a context to the part charged in trie in*
formation; and then, if they were finally sa-
tisfied that the intent of the author was the
intent charged in the information,— consider-
ing it with reference to the context and the
matter of the whole book— if they were sa-
tisfied that such was the intent with which
the author published his book to the world,
it was their duty to find him Guilty.

Gentlemen, I now proceed to state to you
what this information is ; I shall next state to
you generally the substance of the work wbicb
this information charges to be criminal ; I
shall then take leave (with my lord's permis-
sion, and under bis correction) to state to you
what I take to be the law of this countr)r with
respect to the principles of the constitution of
its government; and, in conclusion, I shall
shortly examine, with reference to the princi-
ples so stated, whether this charge (aeain call-
mg your attention to the matter pf the work
which I shall have so previously stated) unon
a due and conscientious attention to the law
of the country as it respects the constitutioo
of its government, to the matter of this bookt
aqd to the intention with which it must have
been ushered into the world, is or is uot sub*
^tantiated.

The information charges, in the words of
the resolution of the House of Commons which
I have stated to you, that the Defendant, in*
tending to raise and excite jealousies and divi*
sions amongst the liege sutnects of our lord the
king, and to alienate the affections qfthe Hegs
subjects of our lord the king^ from the govern*
ment by King, Lords, and Commons, now duly
and happily established by law in this country^
and to destroy and *to subvert the true princi-
ples of the free constitution tf the gavemmeni
qfthe realm, and to brirtg into contempt the
power and dignity qfthe two Houses qfrarlid-
ment of the realm, and with intent to cause it to
be believed that the regal power and govern*
ment of this realm^ might, amsistently with the
freedom of this realm, as by law declared and
established, be carried on in M its ^functions, by
the king of this realm, although the qj^es, du*
ties, and functions, of the Lords spiritual and
temporal, and Commons of this realm,in parlia^
ment assembled, should be suppressed and abo*
lished, upon such a day published the follow-
ing libellous matter; — I shall beg your atten-
tion to the averments in the other counts of
this information before I state the libellous
matter.

The second count in the information varies
the charge in the first, by stating it thus : —
with intent to cause it to be believed^ that the
regal power and government of this realm,might^
consistently with the freedom of this realm, as
by law declared and established, be carried on m
all its functions, by the Jung of this realm,
although the Lords spirUuat and teaaorai^
and Commons of this realm, should^ in jutUf
never be assea^ied in parliament.

637j

on the Engluh Consiituiioh,

A. D. 1796.

[538

The third count states it thus*. — tcith in-
tent to cause U to be believed that the holding of
parliaments is not essential to the exercise ac-
cording to the freedom of this realm, of any of
the functions of the king of this realm, in the
government thereof.

The last count, charges the intent ge-
nerally to be — to bring into contempt the power
4ind dignity of the tzco Hotises of Parliament of
this realm; and I believe it cannot be con-
tended with roe, that if you shall finally be
of opinion, that this publication was brought
into the world, with any of the intents,
charged in any of those counts, it will be
jour duty to find the defendant guilty.

The work, a passage from which is stated
in the information, the averments of which I
have just been mentioning to yon, is a book,
intituled, *^ Thoughts on the English Govem-
<nent» addressed to the quiet good Sense of
the People of England,'* and this appears to
Jiave been the first of an intended Series of
ielters. You will allow me, gentlemen, to
«tate to you by going through it,-— which I
shall be able to do without taking up any con-
siderable portion of my lord's time or yours—
the general tendency of this book, by calling
your attention to the several parts of it as I
go through it, from the beginning to the end,
stating shortly the substance of it; and, when
I come to that passage which is charged in
the information to be criminal, I shall take
the liberty of stating it to my lord and you
very particularly.

Gentlemen, the author, with great truth,
says of the people of this country, tnat we pos-
sess a greater portion of good sense, through
all ranks of society, from the highest to the
lowest, than the people of any or the nations
which surround us. He says, *' I have not
jet seen equal marks of good sense in those
matters, where, of all others, they should be
manifested, I mean in their laws and govern-
ment:*'-—He is there speakine of modem
philosophers and politicians ; — he then says
(and it is fit that I should mention it to
you, on the principle which I have before
stated as that which regards my own conduct)
— he says, " I am not a Ciiixen of the World,
so as to divide my affection with strangers —
I am an Englishman ; and I thank God for
having placed me among a people, who, I
think, possess more gooaness ot heart, and
more good sense than any other in the world ;
and who are the happiest, because they make
the best use of both." He then states in the
third page of the book — what he enforces in
the last page— the influence of this general
^ood sense in the country, over the parties in
It, and over parliament :— he represents, in
€be fifth page, an Englishman, as having a
natural love of liberty, that he has a jealousy
of power without an ambition to partake of it.
He states, in the seventh and eighth pages,
the equality of the people of this country in
their ranks, from the highest to the lowest, in
the view of the law; and theni in the

ninth pa^e, he begins to state that doctrine
which it IS my duly to submit to yon, as being
exceptionable to the extent to which it is
charged to be so in this information; he
says, " The English government is an organ
ot public union and activity, which is adapted
to the humour and mode of thinking of those
who were witnesses to the formation of it,and
who live under it. It appears to me, we may
discern in the whole disposition of it, the re-
sult of that constitution of mind ** — that is,
the good sense of which the author has been
speaking — " which I have just ascribed to our
countrymen. Unambitious, and preferring
the quiet and peace, M'hich enables them
to pursue their own aflairs, to the power
and splendour of managing those of the pub-
lie, the English yield a willing obedience to a.
government not of their own choosing." You
will see presently how far that is consistent
with some other pages in this work. ^< It is
an hereditary king, who bears all the burthen
of government, who is endued with all the
power necessary to carnr it on, and who
enjoys all the honour and pre-eminence ne-
cessary to give splendor to so high a station.
It is the king*8 peace, under which we enjoy
the freedom of our persons and tlie se*
Curity of our property ; he makes and he ere*
cutes the laws, which contain the rules by
which that peace is kept; and for this purpose,
all officers, civil ana military, derive their
authority from him. Still farther to strengthen
this all-powerful sway, two qualities are
added, that seem to bring this royal sove-
reignty, as far as mortal institutions can be,
stiU nearer to the government of heaven.
First this power is to have perpetual continu-
ance, the king never dies. Secondly, such un-
bounded power shall be presumed to be exer-
cised with as eminent goodness ; and it is ac-
cordingly held, that <Ae king can do nowrong ;
meaning, that his person is so sacred, that
wrong shall never be imputed to him."

He then proceeds, gentlemen, to state
what, I think, a fair discharge of my duty
calls upon me to represent to you to bo (to
say the least of it), most unguardedly stated ;
he proceeds, gentlemen, to state the checks
which the constitution has placed round the
application of these general maxims. *' These
are the original and main |irinciples upon
which the plain Englishman, full ot honesty
and confidence, thinks he may rest, for the
protection of his person and property. But
human institutions will swerve from their
original design, and Englishmen will not
always confide; jealousies and fears arise, and
these must be appeased. The reasonable
jealousy of an Englishman seems to be fully
satisfied, when a qualification is annexed td
the power in the king, first, of making, and
secondly, of executing the laws ; by which his
subjects are admitted to participate in a share
of those high trusts.

" Accordingly, the king can eitac^ no laws
without the advice and consent^ not only oC

BSD] 36 GEORGE 111. Trial ffJohn Reeves,, Esq, for a Libel [540

the Lords tpirUual and temporal^ who are in
some sort councillors of his own choosing,
but also of the Common$ ia parliafnent aatm-
hled. And the jealousy with regard to pro-
perty has been such, that in oevisin^ this
measure the subject has suffered a guard to be
put upon himself; for the Commonsy who are
to advise and consent, are not the people at
large, nor are they chosen by the people at
large, but they are the knights, citizens, and
burgesses, who are respectively chosen in
€ouniieSf dtia, and horou^lis, by persons of
substance and sufficiency, who may safely
be trusted with the exercise of a charge where
property is in question.

'* In this manner is the power of the king
<|U8lified in the making ot laws. His power
in executing the laws is qualified b^ joining
grand and petty Juries, in the administration
of justice, with his judges. To these two con-
trols on the power of tlie king, must be added
a principle, which gives the nation another
secority for the. due exercise of the kingly
power ; for, though the king can do no wrong,
yet if wrong is done by the application of the
King's power, as he never acts without advice,
the^ person who advises such application is
vosponsible to the law.''

Gentlemen, you will here permit me to call
your attention for a single moment to that de-
claration which is contained in what I must
state to be the great charter of the ancient,
undoubted, indisputable rights of the people
of England — [ mean the Bill of Eights;
and here I beg your particular attention to
what I hold to be, if not the most important
(I think I may state it to be the most import-
ant), but certainly as important a declaration
contained in that bill as any other which is to
be found in the code of the laws and statutes
which ^secure the rights and liberties of the
people of this kingdom—" Asro that for re*

pBBSS OF ALL GRIEVANCES, AND FOR THE
AMENDING, STRENGTHENING, AND PRESKRVING
OF THE LAWS, PARLIAMENTS OUGHT TO BE

HELD FREQUENTLY.'' It is ou this declaration
that I bottom the assertion that the king of
this country is bound to convene parliaments
frequently, and that the exercise of the pre-
rogative of the king in this country is not a
due exercise of that prerogative except it be
subject (with reference to this article of re-
sponsibility as to the advisers of that exercise)
to the control of the parliament frequently
convened, according to that obligation which
18 here stated to be an obligation under which
the king is placed, and the lienefit of which
is secured to the people of this country by this
declaration.

This passage, gentlemen, wilt deserve your
most serious attention as applied to what I am
pow about to state to you— ^' With the ex-
ception, therefore, of the advice and consent
of the two Houses of parliament "—which ad*
vice and consent you will permit me to state
do not include in them the exercise of their
power of calling upon.thc advisers of the exe-

cutive governiiient to answer for bad advice,
— ** With the exception, therefore, of the ad-
vice and consent of the two Houses of parlia^
ment, and the interposition of juries; the go-
vernment, and the administration of it in all
its parts, may be said to rest wholly and
solely on the king, and those appointed by
him. Those two adjuncts of parliament and
juries are subsidiary and occasional ; but the
king*s power is a substantive one, always vh-
sible and active. By his offlqers, and in his
name, every thing is transacted that relates to
the peace of the realm and the protection of
the subject. The subject feels this, and ac-
knowledges with thankfulness a superintend-
ing sovereignty, which alone is congenial with
the sentiments and temper of Englishmen.
In fine, the government of England is « mo-
narchic; the monarch is the ancient stock
from which have sprung those goodly branches
of the legislature, the Lords and Commons,
that at the same time give ornament to the
tree, and afford shelter to those who seek pro-
tection under it. But these are still only
branches, and derive their origin and their nu-
triment from their common parent; they may
be " — what ? — suspended ?— no— *' they may
be lopped off, and the tree is a tree still ; shorn
indeed of its honours, but not, tike theni,
cast into the fire. The kingly government
may go on, in all its functions," the functions
being before stated to be the making and the
execution of the laws» ** without Lords or
Commons : it has heretofore done so for years
together," — ^The fact, gentlemen, is too true,
and this Bill of Rights is that great charter
which prevents its ever doing so again — *' and
in our times it does so during every recess of
parliament;" — but how does it so during every
recess of parliament ? why, gentlemen, under
the wholesome control which arises from the
conviction, that according to law, that recess
cannot last long, and that those who as ad-
visers of the crown are carrying on the execu-
tive government, roust by-and-by meet that
parliament, one of whose duties it is, to revise
the advise with which the executive govern-
ment acts — '' But without the king his par'-
liament is no more. The kin^, therefore,
alone it is who necessarily subsists, without
change or diminution ; and /rom Aim alone
we unceasingly derive the protection of law
and government.

'* Such are the principles and constitution of
the English government, delivered down to us
from our ancestors; such they can be demon-
strated to be firom the incontestible evidence
of history and records ; and such it is wished
they should continue by nine-tenths of the
nation."

Gentlemen,'! hope and trust, that as far as
I understand the constitution and the govern-
ment of my country, 1 am as much wedded
to them as any man whom I have the honour
to address or to see in this place:— On the
one hand I will, to the last hour of m^ exist-
ence; resist the efforts of those prinnpley of

541]

OM the EngUth ConttUution,

A. D. 1796.

[542

anarchy, which have a direct tendency to
overthrow the government cf this ^country,
as established in a duly attempered constitu*
tlon of King, Lords and Commons, at that
period which I, adopting the language of the
greatest constitutional lawyers who have lived
m this country, call the Revolution ; — On
the other hand, gentlemen, not suspected^ I
believe, of the want of a aue loyal and con-
stitutional attachment to the sovereign of my
country, I say here, distinctly, that if thd^i duty
aUempered constitution of government should
cease to exist, if what are here called the
branches of the tree (the King) the Lords and
Commons — should be lopped off and thrown
into the fire, the tree may be a tree — the king
may be a king— but the king will not be a
British Kiko.

. I proceed, gentlemen, to call your atten-
tion to some other passages in this work. — You
will find that the author, I do him the justice
to state it, says, in page 14, That the best
title of this government is professed to be its
conformity to the principles of reason ; that
it has little to fear from honest disputation,
but that it has much to fear from those who
assume the guise and affectation of great
friends and favourers of what is called t^e
constitution ; that there are persons in this
coimtry (and it is true undoubtedly) who
would rather take the chance to become one
of five hundred republicans that govern by
their ordinances, that is by their own will,
than continue the subjects of a king who go-
verns by law.

The author then proceeds to state the his-
tory of the Beformation in this country, and
of that great event, which some great lawyers
of England have ventured to cal^though this
author would quarrel with the term) a Revo-
lution in the country. He proceeds to re-
mark upon tliat great event in our history
which has been in ordinary language called
the Revolution ; and although this part of
the work has no obvious connexion with the
resolution of the House of Commons which b
copied into this information, still it has the
most material connexion with it as part of the
context of this work, considering the ten-
dency which it must have to give your minds
the true clue by which to construe those pas-
sages which are stated in the information.
** It seems to me," he says, " that most of the
errors and misconceptions relative to the na-
ture of our government have taken their rise
from those two great even ts—<^e Reformaiion,
and what is called the Revolution. There has
»tber been some dissatisfaction with the man-
ner and extent of those two measures, or
some misapprehension of their design, or a
want of insight into the grounds and principles
of the sutject matter, Jiamely, the goveni-
ment in church and state.

^ Those memorable transactions were con-
ducted iaa way that was tiuly English,;*' —
Now, gentlemen, you will altm to this pas-
sage; and it beiongB u> jiutiica io be candid.

and, therefore, I state to you, that when you
come to see some passages in a subsequent
part of this work, you will be astonished that
the author did not take the trouble to read the
whole over together, in order to make it in
some degree consistent — " the actors in them
proceeded with their remedy as far a^ the dis-
ease reached, and no farther; and the;^ never
suffered themselves to lose sight of tins noain
rule, that what they did was to preserve the
ancient government, and not to destroy or
alter it.'* — In this part of the passaze I go
along with the author of this work ; for I as-
' sert that at the Revolution the liberties of this
country were restored, they were not theo
originally created.

Afler stating what passed in this country
during the period of the Reformation, he
treats the Revolution thus : '* The abdication
of king James the 2nd, and the transactions
that ensued upon the vacancy thereby made
in the throne, compose a very important and
curious passage in the history of our govern-
ment and laws. It has been vulgarly called,*'
. — I beg your attention to this passage — ** It
has been vulgarly called, the Revolution;
upon what autnonty I know not; it was not
so named by parliament, nor is it a term
known to our laws. This term had certainly
no better origin than the conversation and
pamphlets of the time, where words are used,
m a popular and historical sense, without any
regard or thought of technical propriety.
But, unfortunately, this invention, or misap-
plication of words, leads to a confusion of
ideas ; knowledge is thereby put into a retro-
grade course ; instead of going from things to
words, we are obliged to pass from words to
things : let the term Revolution be once con-
secrated as the true denomination of that
event, and the mind ascribes to that transac-
tion every thing which it can conceive to bei-
long to the term. Too many among us use
the word in some such indeterminate zeneral
sensej and such persons are accordingly mis-
led by notions that have no sortof counexion
with the thing of which they are speaking :
and yet it is remarkable, that those who em-
brace this phantom, do it with a zeal and pre-
possession which we do not see in those who
re^rd the substance and realihr. These men
thmk they can never show sufficient warmth
and emotion when they name the RevolntionJ*
— ^Now, gentlemen, this is an event in our his-
tory which, you know, uixder the ordinance of
the government, is annually commemorated
at this moment in all our churches.* — ** These

* In the year 1789, a bill was passed by
the House of Commons *^ to establish a per-
petual anniversary thanksgiving t» Almighty
God, for. having, fay the ^onous Revolution,
delivered this nation from arbitraiy power |
and to commemorate aniuially, the confirma-
tion ef the people's rights.'' An inefBectual
oppusitiea was madeto the introduction of this
bill; see the debate, thereupoa in the Netjf

543] 36 GEORGE III. Trial of John Reeves, £sq./or d Libd l&H

agents ; what was merit in the one class of
men, was none in the other. Those who
loved the ancient government, and knew the
value of monarchy, had great prepossessions
to sacrifice before they could take such a
step, thoueh for the preservation of both,
and though they knew that on the pre-
servation of l>oth depended their laws
and liberties. But the rest, who had no par-
tiality for monarchy, or who were ignorant
or careless of its value; the Republican^
the Presbyterian^ and the Sectaries^ id
whom may be added a lone train of the
abandoned and dissolute ; noting was more
easv to them, than to join in any thing that
looked like successful rebellion*'— that is to
join in the Revolution. — << Those who hated the
very frame of the government could not but
be pleased with the shock it now received :
some hoped that the change might lead to
other innovations; those who had been used
to pull down and destroy, gladly saw a pros-
pect of reviving their old trade ; persons with-
out a determinate object, were yet tpo much
amused with novelty not to be on the side of
the authors of it.

" Whatever were their motives for joming in
the new settlement, the Republicans, Presby^
terianSf and Sectaries, did not fail soon after-
wards to urge their merit, and it must be con-
fessed not without some show of reason. It
was a fortunate crisis to them ;" This author,
who in page 9, had stated a passage, upon
which I TOfore observed, namely, that we
yield an obedience to a government, not of
our own choosing, says here, "It was a for-
tunate crisis to them ;" the Republicans, Pres-
byterians, and Sectaries ; ** tney now saw a
^vernment which they had a hand in rear-
mg : they thought they should no longer be
regarded with jealousy, and suspicion ; and
they hoped now te make themselves a party
in the state, instead of being considered as a
party against it. Bending all their endea-
deavours to this point, the first thin^ to be
done was to get a good name. For this pur-
pose, they took their stand among the
iTAt^f ; under the pretence of that wa]^ of
thinking, they began to vent their political
opinions; which, however, they now so tem-
pered and turned, as to adapt them to the
government established by law. As they
sacrificed the rigour of their own notions, they
did not fail to take a nmilar liberty with the
principles of the government ; and so they
have gone on, from those tiroes to our own,
corrupting the genuine principles of the Eng-
lish laws and government, m order to smt
them to their own theories and systems, till
they have filled the whole with uncertainty;
and the amstUuiion, of which they are so in-
cessantly debating, is made one of the
most doubtful and difficult things to eompre«
hend."

Now, gentlemen, the persons wboro,
throughout the jpassalKe I have last mentioned^
this author has descnW under the term they,

men tliink they can never show sufficient
warmth and emotion when they name the
Revolution ; they form clubs to swear by, and
worship it ; they make ereat feasts to cele-
brate it ; they have no love for the constitU'
tion but for that which was formed at the Re-
volution, and they are good subjects and loyal,
only upon Revolution principles,

** What can be the cause of this mighty
2eal } whence does it originate ? and to what
does it tend?— This beloved Revolution hap-
pened more than a century ago ; so that all
the heat which naturally attends such a crisis,
and which may be kept up while it was re-
cent, must have long since cooled and died
away. No one. can say, that any of the
causes which produced that event, have re-
curred in our time, so as to remind us of the
remedies our ancestors applied on that occa-
casion.** — *^ Who, besides themselves, say or
think any thing about them [that is, the pro-
ceedings at the time of . the Revolution] ?
They are recorded in our statute-book, like,
other matters of equal importance, and are
the objects of serious study and contempla-
tion ;" — and then the author says very truly
(and this passage will on his behalf deserve
your attention)— •' precedents that are re-
garded with reverence and with gratitude to-
wards those who made them, but which we
hope never to have occasion to follow." — He
then states in page forty-one, " that so much
commemoration of that Revolution, repeat-
edly urged out of all season and measure,
cannot sound agreeably in the ears of the so-
Tcreign."

In page forty- two, gentlemen, there are the
following passages — ** But though the term
Revolution throws confusion on the nature of
the event it is meant to denote, it must yet
be confessed^ that it is not wholly without
analogy to. the circumstances attending it
As this term is of a comprehensive and loose
import, and of a capacity for the worst men
to nnd their own meaning in it, so that event,
which was brought about**— These passages,

Sntlemen, well deserve, both on the pa^t of
e constitution, and on the part of the defen-
dant, great attention from you ; — " which was
brought about by the energy, good sense, and
firmness, of some of the best and greatest men
In the nation, was of a nature (unlike most
good things) to be helped on by the concur-
rence and approbation of some of the worst
men that could be found. But there was this
difference between the two descriptions of

Parliamentary History, Vol. 27, p. 1838. —
Ailer a short debate in the House of Lords,
the bill was rejected ; on a division, there ap-
peared against the first reading 18, for it 6.
see the New Parliamentaiy iustoiy^ Tol. 88,
p. S94.

The commemoration of the Revolution,
adverted to ^ the Attorney- general, will he
found in the Form of Prayer, appointed to be
vsed on the fifth, day of Novemoer,

MS]

tm the EngUth Comtitutum.

A. D. 179^.

Jon will be jileaaed on the part of the public
to recollect are those whom he calls the Re-
publicans, Presbyterians, and Sectaries.

'' To these men, and to this sinister design,
we are indebted for the jargon of which I have
just complained. They invented^— jrou see
with what truth and accuracy in the history
of this country this is stated— '< Tkey invented
the term jRm/ution, to blind and mislead :''
They invented it ! — " and they have never
ceased repeating it, that they may put the
people in mind of making another." Gentle-
men, those who have used it, in the most so-
lemn proceedings in this country, as I shall
have occasion to establish to you by-and-by,
have used it, for the very purpose, as I appre«
bend, of not putting the people in mind of
making another, but of putting the people in
mind, that by the transactions of that day,
both with respect to the regal sovernment of
the country, and the interest of the people in
their ri^ts and liberties, as well in the one
view of the constitution as in the other, they
were then restored, and for ever inviolably to
be preserved. " This mystery they have
couched under the still more loose metaphysi-
cal idea of Revolution Principles ; and by the
glorious spell of-^Me conet^ution — they can
. conjure up any form, fashion, modification,
veform, change, or innovation in government
they please, and it shall be nothing more, as
they pretend, than the genuine true English
constitution." The author then proceeds, gen-
tlemen, to state in several passages, which
may deserve your attention, remarks upon
what is called the constitution. He then ap-
plies himself again to the Revolution in pace
nfty two, where he says, " It appears from the
former of these statutes, that the parliament,
havine placed king William and queen Mary
upon the throne, which king James chose to
leave vacant by his abdication, stipulated no-
thing for the people but upon those points
where king James had broken the law, or
what was understood by the generality of men
to be the law of the land. Indeed the nature
of the case demonstrates this; for, if what he
did .had not been against law, he would have
broken no trust, and the parliament would
have had no ground of complaint."

Gentlemen, I observe here, that it is idle

[546

the most important passages in the book; it
is not for me to say, that the matter of this
passage has been handed to the public with a
designed omission of a most important obser-
vation ; it is my duty to mark the circum-
stance, and it will be yours to say what intent
can be imputed to the author, if the circum-
stance should appear to you to be properly and
accurately observed upon.

Gentlemen, you will find in the Bill of
Rights (a part of which I shall have occasion
to read to you presently) that there are twelve
articles, in which it is stated that king James
the second endeavoured to subvert and exter-
minate the protestant religion, and the laws
and liberties of this kinsdom. You will find,
that there is a solemn oeclaratton on the part
of ourancestors that these twelve circumstances
were violations of the ancient, indubitable, in-
disputable riehts and liberties of the people of
England. You will give me your attention
to what has been stated with respect to the
king canning on the government otthe coun->
try in all its fiinctions without the Lords and
Commons ; you will find that at that period,
at that ^eat a;ra of the restoration of our
liberties, m the Declaration of oua Rights
AND Liberties, the parliament state lastly in
a thirteenth declaration, " that for redress of
all grievances,*' those enumerated among
others,/' and for the amending, strengthening,
and preserving of the laws, parliaments ought
to be held frequently." Now, says this
author who had oefore stated that passage
with respect to the King, Lords and Com-
mons, which I had occasion to read to you,
" the other points, which were twelve m
number," not takmg any notice of the thir-
teenth, with respect to the necessity of fre*
quently holding parliaments, •* were, as T
nave said, known to be the law of the land be-
fore, and were now declared and secured by
express definition in parliament, only that
what had been recent cause of alarm, what
was so deeply impressed on the minds of
all, and what might be thought, from late ex-
perience, to "be of a nature that required it
should be solemnly inculcated, might be held
up for admonition to future aces.

" What disappointment and discomfiture it
must be to these idolizers of the constitution

— — Y ^"-^r --"'> -.—•-. w — .^ . UIU9I. uc lu inese iQoiizers or me consuxuiion

to state, that the parliament may have ground supposed to be established at the Revolvtion,

of complaint, if it be true, that the kingly go-
vernment can go on in all its functions, witli-
out Lords or Commons, and, if it may do so
for many years ; but I am to contend, there is
not a principle more false in the law and con-
stitution of the country than that is. ** There
is only one exception to this ; and that is,
Jaines l>eine a Papist : that certainly was not
against any law ; but it was against the dispo-
sition of the nation ; and it was now the plea-
sure of parliament, that the king on the throne
should be a Protestant, which was accordingly
in this statute provided for in future." Now to
what follows I would beg your attention^ be-
cause it appears to me I confaas; to be one pf
VOL, XXVI.

to discover at length that they have bestowed
their applause and affection upon the shfcds
and patches of old date ; and that if they had
lived in those wicked reigns of Charles ^nd,
and James Snd, they would have enjoyed in
theory, though not in practice (and theory, of
the two, is more considered by modern re-
formers), as good a constitution as they have
had since, with the single exception of a Pro-
testant king." The author then goes on to
state observations upon what he calls ConjAi-
tutkmal lawyerty upon what he calls Whigs^
and upon what he calls Democrats ; they are
many of them observations of great merit,,
they are all of them observations, which, in a
S N

5471 36 GEQRGS UI. Trial ^Jdm Amut, A^^J^r 0 LibA [M8

questipD between bim and Ihe covoii^, wiU
foth towards the country, and tpwacds him
require your attention; but theydo not ap-
pear to me to be 80 material with reapect to
the question which vou are now called upon
io decide, as to make it necessary for me to
alate to yog, particularly, what foUows in Ihe
ffubsequent pages of this book.

Gentlemen, the ^eat end of .all apvem-
ment, of every constitution (by whiiicb 1 mean
Ibe frame of the govemmant in ^en
aoontrv),is j»outicai. LiauiTr; andlsbaU
atate those projpositions to you in th^ words
of some or the most aitproved writers in
the country. '* Political iiherty is no other
than natural liberty so far restrained by hu-
inan laws (and no ftrtber) as is aeoessary
and expedient for the general aAwwtage of
the public f and '< that conslitution or framue
of govemmeni^that system of laws is alone
caloilaled to maintain it which leaves the aub-
ject entire master of his own con4w:t,e3ioept
m those points wherein the public sMeiy re-
quires some direction or natraint" Jt has
been observed by a great foreign wriler that
liberty is the direct end and ^m of the con-
atituUon of England. It has been observed
hy a great writer of our own country, that
^ the idea and practice of this liberty nourbh
in their hichest vigour in tiiese kingdoms
where it faUs little short of perfection, and.
«an ooly'be lost or destroved by the folly or
demerits of its owner : the legislatore, and
of course the laws of England, heme peculiarly
adapted to the presentation of this in-
estimable blessing even in the meanest sub-
ject."

. Gentleman, .there are two -ways i|i wlu^
the happiest people In the world, n they were
wise enough to know their own faappinessy I
mean the people amongst whom i am now
speaking, may lose this inestimable Idessing ;
the one is, by not being wise enough to prise,
as we ought to prize, the genuine libevty which
we haveP)ut valuing it too little ; the other is
by valuii^ it not too much, for we cannot
vilue it too much, but in our seal &r it Josiog
flight of what is ua true natuxe, and feaing
nght of the obligation which wc are every
one of us under, to support, at all haaard,
what are the genuine and true principles upon
which it subsists.

Gentlemen, no government is perhape a
letter thing than a government or anarchy,
if indeed anarchy must not exist where there
is no government; but it is the duty of every
Britisn subject to remember that he has a
British king at the head of a British consti-
tution to defend; and upon this occasion, I am
not sorry, that it has become my duty to have
had^ in the course of afewvears (^m the
hegmning of the discharge or my duties in my
presentsituation^devolved upon me many labo-
rious and painful tasks in prosecuting the sub-
j^ta of the country; some of whom appear to
me to mean the destructioo of this conatitution
i)y very different itteans from those whidil

bane feuttd it nqridulir qbod 4iia««c*iil loia^
|iute<tothe«ulborof tmsfiook; fnanyimaaDMp
tions I have been obliged 4o inetitute; but i|
must be remembered, that Abe ilaw as .eM|ual to
all men, and whether the subjeol matter of tho
accusation, be a libel upon the kitogly tart of
the functions of the government, or whether
it be a work tliat. lends it# -fluppsesa Abo
^nuine feelings of adoration and rewetence^
which the subiects of this oauntay owe to the
other essential parts of the goaennventof tho
country; eaoh work is equally jnkchievou^
and the lawmeaned to protect thejaubjectsef
the cQUDiry, against the Apeiaitionsflfoacii.

Gentlemen, lamaolihereidflCeniniMi^,— «
it is not a^. ppovinoe,— -^t this author wioia
with Ifae intent chai^ upon this inforon*
tion ; it is my dutv to auboNt to you tko
grounds Aipon whieb thia -cbafge has boui
made. Now, I apprehend, that the mat
principle establishei at tbe ftemohttion ^or I
must still term 'VLf^t^ whii^ fioNwiflilion HA
not form the constitution of Hhia country, hot
restored thenncieot conatiMiaa of tfMSconn*
try ,— I apprehend, that the great MBoiplr oa*
tahliahed at the RevohijUon was this : Ihct ifao
legislative eevermnent of 4he«ounkry ahauU
be in the &uig,Iiaids,«Qa Gomuucs; (thai
the executive government of ihe eoaoAij
should be vested in the king; that far th!a
purpose of canryinp en that caaoutiva go*
vemment, he ahoold be endowed withgpunt
and high prerogatives, loutar oariauf oMSlifiH
timuU pkeekt and ptwuiafis, .amo wivb a
KABKED aasnoiiaiBiiiiTT IV nas amnanaa or
TBS xucravE oovaMfMsxr to 'Vb i
axAvavT or vaa couarxv.

The sepanation of theAepskMaa and
cntWe power in our govoraawnt has
quently been lemarliad as ooedT Iho
ofthe liberty which asa«Mpy) H ibof katk
eaistad is the aane faodias «f sea, jwo
would soon, as it kas iheen tAa^rwtA, kav» a^m
raonical laws eaecuted in a iytanniaal inao-
ner. The promfdnesa and eapeditioB wslk
whidi laws auist be eneoited, hovo 4ei ta
vesting in the king aloaa the
power ai the eaunlry; but it baa
Huod neceasaiy looiliat theeiocutiae
trate of the country ahouki be a haawch^ol'
the legislature of the country, beeauaa if the
kgjuurture of the countiy wene totally ao*
parate fiRom,Bod nnoannteled with theeii^
cutive magistrale, the eaperieoce of att coun-
tries, and of our own in aaaae inetancea, haa
ahown that the lagiaktiae, wiouM prdbMy
assume both powers lo the min of that Ubai^
which is meant to he preserved by tho aapa-
cation of each.

Gentlemen of the Jury, tka ngik> vwn
paiMAKT Rioava of Bng^hinen aae, their
right to personal liberty, liwir ri^ttoperso-
BU aeouiity, and their right to pfopert3F---these
—without calltns yxmr attention to thaaa
have been seooreato thoattluei^oflfaiaootan-
trjriiy aninfinita variety of legialalivo— I waa
going to aay pfaattMMtt*-4gr aniafinile varied

54t!|

o^iheSngluh ConstUuiion.

A. D. 1796.

[550

o# ligteMte' diocimtfonft of wHat h tbe eom-
moo law of thte country in which we hve. I
n^yon f> those declarations in the statutes
of Ihiv comiry, from the great charter of our
]ibeifftB9y Unrongft the confirmations of that
chiMer, to tlie PetitSeo of Right, to the Ha-
boatCoypns act, to the Bill or Rights, to the
pritoeipftM tipon which our ancestors acted at
the Revolution^ and finailjr to the Act of Set-
tltnent.

Biit^ Oentlenen' of the J^irv, it is to no pur-
pOM that the rights of Englishmen are ascer-
ImbmI aad explained, unless there are also ao-
tivv provisions for the security of their enjbj-
BMnt of them, and Hiis the wisdom of the eo-
wnment of this country has provided for, hy
glMag you tbe opportuni^ of applying to
ooaMb OT justke, of pe^tionmg the kmg and
the pariiament, and in the essential attri-
butes of that parliament which forms the eo-
^cmment of me country. Gentlemen, if tne
eseeutive pait of the government is to act
whk responsible advisers,, it is of necessity
that a eonstflutlott which has that provision
ihoold hovemadfe it part of the bounden duty
of the kmg, ft«quently tb assemble pariiap
nMDtai If, on the other hand, there are griev-
ances and' injuries to be redressed in this con-
atilttlion, which cannot be redressed by the
or&ianf operMlon of Ihw, it is equally essen-
tial t» Cbe-liberties andease of the subiect that
pvfiaments should be frequently called ; and
tberefbre it appears to me thatthe great prin^
dple, which was restored at the Revolution,
iathia— namely, that for the redress of all
grievances, ana for the amending, strengthen-
ing, and preserving of the laws^ pariiaments
ouabi to be held frequently.

Upon this* occasion^ gentlemen, your atten-
tion will ha due tk> eveiy part of this act. It
IS fiir daelkring the rights and liberties of the
nbject; ir declares that king James, by the
^ — * — - of divere. evil connsellora^ judges,

ten, employed b^ him, did' endea-

!»• subvert) and extirpate the' Protes-
tant Mligion, and* the laws' and liberties of
the kin^om ; it then* states the various in-
stances m which he did so, all of which it de-
ckrestare utteify and directly contrary to the
known iaws^nd statutes and freedom of this
realm. It then 6tates^<'\And whereas the
said late kihg James the second, tiavins ab-
dicated thegovernment^ and the throne being
thereby vaoant, his highness the Prince of
Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God
to make tfti^ glorious instrument ofuelivering
thisJcingdomfrom popery and arbitrary fiower)
did. (by the advice of the Lords spiritual
and temporal, and divers principal persons of
the Ck>mmons^ cause letters to be written to
the Lords spinuial and temporal, heme Pro-
thstspts ; and other letters to the severafcoun*
tisii cHies, universities, borouzhs, and cinque-
portSy for the choosing of sucn persons to re*
present them, as were ofrighttobesentto
parliament^ in order to such an establishment
ss that tbstFMdigion|lawS| andliberties might

H

not again be in danger of being subverted :*' —
They then assert that they are a full and free
representative of this nation: They then de-
clare, that all those transactions were against
the common law of the land ; that for redress '
of grievances, parliaments ought to be held
freouently : And tiien they ** daim, demand,
ana insist upon all and singular the premises,
as their undoubted rights and liberties ; and
that no declarations, judgments, doings, or
proceedings, to the prejudice of the people in
any of the said premises, ought in any wise
to be drawn hereidler intb consequence or ex-
ample." And then it is enactea, *' That all
and singular the rights and' liberties asserted
and claimed in the said declaration are the
true, ancient, and indubitable rishts and li-
berties of the people ofthb kingoom; and so
shall be esteemed, allowed, adjudged, deemed,
and taken to be ;'and that all and every the
particulars aforesud. shall be firmly and
strictly holden* and observed as they are ex-
pressed in the said declaration ; and all offi-
ters and ministers whatsoever, shall serve
their majesties and their successors, accord-
ing to the same in all times to come."

This general declaration, that parliaments
were to oe held fiequently, was followed up
by an express act or pariiament, in the sixth
year of William and Mary, which declares
that by the ancient lawe and statutes of this
kingdom, frequent pariiaments' ought to be
held; and therefore it declares that from
henceforth, a pariiament'shall be holden once
in three years at the least: The effect of
which statute is this;— not that the govern-
ment can go on in all its functions during
these three years, but that even with respect
to the functions of the executive government,
it is to go on under an apprehension in the
minds of Uiose who are constitutionally re-
sponsible for the exercise of the executive go-
vernment, that they may be called upon when
this parliament is to be called, at the end of
this Jiniited time at farthest, to answer for the
advice which they havft given to the executive
power. Arid, gentlemen^ it was not long af-
ter this before a- very solemn proceeding look
place in parliament ; and it surprised me a
good- deal; — recollectine that I had the ho-
nour of being present when his lordship saw
a jury of this country not long ago, in the case
of Mr. Paine*, convict him for a libel rioted
in the rtcnrd to fe, upon the happt Revolu-
tion ox THIS CouMTRT — ^it surpriscd me, I say,
a good deal, that this writer should state that
this term ^ Revolution,*' according to the
passage which I have before read to you, was
only to be found in the pamphlets of the
times, but forms no part of the legal proceed-
ings, and was not to be found in the parlia-
mentary proceedings of the country. Tnat he
should treat that term with the sort of disre-
spect which throughout the whole of this book

ou see he attributes to it, appeared to me to
most extraordinaiy.

C

* See it, anll^ Vol. 28. p. 357.

551] 36 GEORGE III. Trial of John Reeves^ Esq./or a Lihd [55S

GeDtleaieiiy I will here take leaye to state
to you, that so early as the year 1709, doctor
Sacheverell was impeached hy the House of
Commons before the Lords House of Parlia-
ment, and the charge was this :

" Whereas this late majesty king William
the third, then prince of Orange, did with an
armed force undertake a glorious enterprise
fur delivering this kingdom from popery and
arbitrary power ; and divers subjects ot this
realm, well affected to their country, joined
with, and assisted his late maiesty in the said
enterprise: and it having pleased almighty
God to crown the same with success, the late
happy Revolution did take effect and was es-
tablished. And whereas the said glorious en-
terprise is approved by several acts of parlia-
ipent, and amongst others by an act made in
the first year of the reign of King William and
queen Mary, intituled, ' An act, declaring the
' rights and liberties of the subject, and set-
' thng the succession of the crown :' and the
actings of the said well affected subjects, in
aid and pursuance of the said enterprise,
are also declared to have been necessary, and
that the same ought to be justified. And
whereas the happy and blessed consequences
of the said Revolution are, the enjoyment of
the light of God's true religion, established
among us, and of the laws and liberties of the
kingdom ; the uniting her majesty's Protes-
tant subjects in interest and affection, by le-
gal indulgence or toleration, granted to dis-
senters ; the preservation of her majesty's sa-
cred person ; the many and continual bene-
fits, arising from hejr majesty's wise and glo-
rious admmistration, and the prospect of hap-
piness for future aees, by the settlement of
the succession of the crown in the Protestant
line." And then the first charge is, that
" Dr. Sacheverell, in his sermon preached at
St. Paul's, doth suggest and mam tain, that
the necessary means used to bring about the
said happy Revolution, were odious and unjus-
tifiable."

Gentlemen, a person of whom certainly I
cannot speak with too great respect — the pre-
decessor of his lordship in an office * which
they both held so much to the honour of
themselves and the benefit of the country, — I
mean sir Joseph Jekyll, — in addressing the
House of Lords upon this impeachment, he
acted like an extremely wise man, who knew
the value of the constitution which was thus
restored at the time of the Revolution ; who
was strenuous for the maintenance of that
constitution, and who was much too wise to
endanger its existence by a loose assertion of
principles which might lead to shake the
foundations of th^t great blessing ; — he ex-
presses himself thus : "As it is self-evident
that ihe honour of her majesty's government
stands upon the justice of the Revolution," — I
have no hesitation, gentlemen, in asserting,
tjiat with respect to his majesty who now

• That of Master of the Rolls.

reigns among us — ** so doth th« peace and
tranauillity oTit depend upon that also.***

'Mn clearing up and vindicating the jus-
tice of the Revolution, which was the second
thinz proposed, it is far from the intent of
the Commons, to state the limits and bounds
of the subject's submission to the soverei^.
That which the law has been wisely silent m,
the Commons desire to be silent m too ; nor
will they put any case of a justifiable rests- .
tance, but that of the Revofotiononly; and
they persuade themselves that the doing right
to that resistance, will be so far from promot-
ing popular licence or confusion, that it will
have a contrary effect, and be a means of
settline men's minds in the love of, and vene-
ration Tor the laws; to rescue and secure which
was the only aim and intention of those con-
cerned in that resistance.

" To make out the justice of the Revolu-
tion, it may be laid down, that as the law is *
the only measure of the princess authority,
and the people's subjection, so the law derives
its being ana efficacy from common consent.f "*

*' Nothing is plainer, than that the peo-
ple have a right to the laws and the consti-
tution. This right the nation hath asserted,
and recovered out of the hands of those who .
had dispossessed them of it at several times.
There are of this two famous instances in the >
knowledge of the present age ; I mean that of*
the Restoration, and that of the Revolution;"
— mark, gentlemen, what was the effect which
this great man attributed to those events both
with respect to the people and the king;-^
*' in both these great events were the reeai
power and the rights of the people recovered."
He means, I presume to say, tnat such a re-
gal power as existed in practice, though not
m theory, immediately before this event of*
the Revolution was not the old British regal .
power; — ''In both these great events were
the regal power and the rights of the people
recovered. And it is hard to say in which the
people have the greatest interest; for the
Commons are sensible, that there is not one
legal power belonging to the crown, but they
have an interest in it; and I doubt not, but
they will always be as careful to support the
rights of the crown, as their own privileges/'.t

Gentlemen, the principle of the constitu-
tion, was stated by another great man§ of
that day thus : he says not that kingly go-
vernment can go on in all its functions without
Lords and Commons, but that " the nature of
our constitution is that of a limited monarchy,
wherein the supreme power is communicated
and divided between Queen, Lords, and Com-
mons, though the executive power and admi-
nistration be wholly in the crown."

* Sir Joseph Jekyll's speech on the second
day of the trial of Dr. Sacheverell, eitfd vol.
15, p. 96.

+ Ibid. p. 97.

X Ibid,

I Mr. Lechmere ; See his speech VoL 15,
;>. 01. ' „

553]

CH the En^liA ConMilution,

Gentlemen of the jury, I might here refer
yog to one of the latest writers on the consti-
tution of the country, I mean Mr. Justice
Blackstone, where he speaks of the parlia-
ment of this country, of the king*s duties,
and of the king's prerogative, but I will not
occupy much more of your time. I state it
to you as the result of his disquisition on this
subject — as his collection from the laws and
statutes of this country, declaratory of the
common law of this country, that which has
subsisted in it for ages — ^that the great secu-
rity of the Britidi subject in the exercise and
in the enjoyment of his rights and privileges
is (as in the nature of thincs it must be) the
oo-existence of King, Lords, and Commons,
to redress grievances by legislation, and to
redress all those grievances which should
arise from an ill-advised exercise of the power
of the executive government; the constitution
holding every man responsible to the justice
of the countr]^ for the advice which he gives
CD the crown in the execution of those duties
which it has imposed upon the Crown, and
which duties I need not state to you are itaost
solemnly recovnized— are most solemnly im-
posed upon tne Crown itself— in that sacred
act — the king's taking the coronation oath,
when he swears to execute the laws of the
country according to the statutes in parlia-
ment agreed upon . (and which I presume
must afio mean to be agreed upon) for the
amending and strengthening the laws ; to exe-
cute justice in mercy, and to support the es-
tablished religion, and the toleration which
other persons enjoy in this coimtij. Then,
gentlemen, if this be the true prmciple of the
constitution, it b for you to look through this
book, and to say, whether the intention of
this author is such or is not such as has been
imputed to him.

Gentlemen, I shall state to you in this case
what I shall have occasion to state with res-
pect to other persons whom it is unfortunately
my duty to prosecute in this place in a day or
two ; if vou arc of opinion that this is an ill-
advised ill- execution of a purpose which was
really not criminal, I told a British House of
Commons what I hope I may say in every
part of Great Britain ; it is not consonant to
the lenient genuine spirit of the law under
which we live, that in such a case you should
press a man with the consequences of guilt.
But if, on the other hand, you are satisfied
upon attending to the whole of this book,
that the purpose of the author was criminal
as it is charged in this information ; that he
has attempted to shake the foundation of
that security which is afforded to a British
subject by our constitution, under the govern-
ment of a British king and a British parhament;
in that case it is your duty, according to all
you owe to the constitution and government
under which we live, to pronounce that verdict
which b due to him, to God; and to the coun-
try.

A. D. 1796.

EVIDEHCE FOR THE CaOWN.

[554

Mr. Benton sworn. — Examined by Mr. Imw.
[Afterwards lord EUenborough and C. J. B.'
R.]

That is the pamphlet, I believe, which was
laid upon the table of the Ilouse of Commons?
—It is.

Have you had it in your custody ever since?
—I have.

Mr. Plurner, — I think it right to state that
I am instructed by Mr. Reeves upon the pre-
sent occasion to say he does not wish to
shrink from this inquiry, and he has ex-
pressly instructed me to admit the publica-
tion.

Mr. Loaten. — ^This book appears to be pub-
lished at London, printed lor J. Owen No.
168 Piccadilly, in the year 1795 : it is intituled
** Thoughts on the English Government^ ad-
dressed to the quiet good sense of the people of
England^ in a Series (^ Letters.*'

[Mr. Lowten read the extracts set forth in-
the Information, and some other extracts
which were called for by Mr. Plumer.}

Charles Macdowal sworn. — Examined by Mr.
Solicitor General [Sir John Mitford af-
terwards lord Redesdale and lord chan-
cellor of Ireland.]

Look at that pamphlet : do^ou know it?—*
Yes.

Where .was it printed?*- At Mr. Wright's
in Peterborough -coiirt. Fleet-street.

Are you employed by Mr. Wright ?— Yes. •

In what way ? — ^As a compositor.

Had you any thing to do with that pam-
phlet ? — Yes ; I composed a part of it.

Do you know Mr. Reeves P — Yes.

Did you see him during the time that pam-
phlet was composing? — Yes.

Had he any concern with it ?— I believe he'
had ; I used to see him frequently at the of-
fice during the time it was printed, and I be- -
lieve that he used to have all the proof'
sheets.

Do you know he had the proofs of it? —
Yes.

How do you know it P — By having given
the proofs into his own hand myself.

Who corrected the proof sheets ? — I do not
know.

Stephen Jones svfom, — Examined by Mr.

Law,

You are employed, I believe in Mr. Wright's
office ? — I am.

In what department? — As his overseer.

Did you superintend this pamphlet as it-
went through the press?—! did.

Did you correct the proofs ? — I did. ^

Did any person in conjunction with you'
correct them ? — Yes, Mr. Wright.

Did any other person [besides Mr. Wright]
in conjunction with you and Mr. Wright cor-
rect the proofs ?-^Not immediately in con-

555]

36 GEORGE UI. Trial t^John Bemi, Esfijbr a LibH f5Sff

junction with us, a gjsntieman certainly did
correct the proofs.

What ^atlemsB was that ?--^r. Reeves;
ha sapen&tended the proof sheets generally
after I had done with them.

Do ^ou know Mr.ReeiKes's hand-writing?
-*-I think I do.

Mr. Henry Gunnel sworn. — Examined by
Jllr. Garrtw [Afterwards a Baron of the
exchequer.]

Wliat have you in vour hand? — Some proof
sheets that were prouuced before a commit-
tee of the House of Commons appointed to
inquire who was the author of the pamphlet
iff question.*

5^p&ils Jema a^ia ennsaed*

Are these the proof sheets that were cor-
rected by Mr. Reeves, and is there any of
his hand-writiilg upon them f — They are the
proofSi

Is the hand-writing you see there Mr.
Beevias^?^-Foffthe moalpart iftis.

Defescb.

Mr. Fiumer, — [Aflerwards, successively,
vice chancellor' of England and master o£ the
RoHaJ. Gentlemen of the jury; — ^I have the
honour to attend you in this case as counsel
for the Defendant : — ^and, gentlemen, it is im-
possible, in aUempUng to dischai^ this im-
Krtant duty to the defendant, and to the pub*
: intarests which are involved in i% but that
I should feel rauch anxiety pressing upon my
mind.

But, gentlemen, I an pecttuded, that how-
ever iU i may ht^ thought to merit your at-
tention yet ymxt desire ta do justice upon this
important oecasion will insure me a favour-^
able altentioft to the obs«n«lieas which I
shall submit to you, on* the part of thedfe*
ftndaat; I shall endeavour to deserve thie, by
confining those observations, as well as I am
able^ suictly to the question submitted
to your ooDsideration in this proceeding.

Gentlemen, the defendant has instructed
me not to interpose any obstacles of form in
the way of this proceediiijg, but to let tlw
sttlgectoonie to your examination in the ful-
lest mode of inquiry which the nature of the
case admits. I am, therefore, perfectly ready
on his part to admit, that if there be any thing
criminal in. the passage selected for accusa-
tion in the work in question, Mr. Reeves as
Sblisher is unquestionably answerable for it.
It I submit to you, and I trust that with a
very little degree of your attention, I shall be
able to prove to the satisflMrtion of every one
of you, that in this pessa^ which is now the
subject of inquiry, toere ia not to be found, in
fiur constnicliun, anyt word, any syllable,
wiiicUoia merit tha.amaUesi degree of repro*
Vation.

«p«

* Sea the two Reports presented by this
committee to the Uousa of Cominont, 33 New
Perl. Hist. 651| to t«

Gentlemen, ia> the introduction of this pro-
secution, the attorney general has been pleas*
ed to state to you, that *' he conducted it bf
the command of bis majesty in censequencoF
of a reK>lution of the House of Comaioas.'* t
should very ill discharce the duty that is*
imposed on me upon the present occasion,
and very little follow the sentiments of tho'
gentleman for whom I appear, if any^ treat-*
mentwhicfa he has ever received could fRMsi**
Uy induce him toatter or toinstnietmelkitt^
ter one syllable of disrespect to the House of
Commons. We all know the high andele-'
voted sitnalion it possesses in this oounlryv
how dear it is to every mn who values the
constitntioA of the country, and I am sure I
oannot name one, who has upon every occa»
9m shown himself more sealously attached-
to thai constitution io all its branches; few
who bsve been equallv active ; and I nay add
farther still, few who have bees more suoeess^
fid in tbs defence of it.

But, gentlemen, fiermit me to say, thal^
this is< notsf topic wtuch* oueht to operate oar
yoor judgment in deciding the Question sub^'
mitted to your determination. The accma-
lion is neither more true nor more false whe-
ther it cornea from the House of Commons or
from the House of Copenhasen. It is an ac*
cusalion which must speafc for itself; and*
feom whatever quarter it originates^ you are
to weieh, you are to discuss, and you are
to decide it according to the evidence ap-^
plied to the charge submitted to your
inquiry, without any regard as to who*
made i^ who advised it, who sent it here,
or by what authority the prosecution ia
instituted. And I am persuaded you will not
forget, while so much is said.about the eaoeU
lent constitution under which we live, how
important it is to the preservation of the U-^
barties of the countiy, to keep distinct the dif-
ferent prooeedingB of the different braocher
of the legislature, nor that important observa-
tton whickis made by a writer whom the attor-
ney general has quoted, that ** In this distinct
and' separate etisteuce ef the judicial power
in a-pectdiar bodv of men, nominated indeed,
but not removable at pleasure, by the crown,
oonsista one main preservative of the public
liberty; which cannot subsist long in any
state, unless the administration of common
justice be in some degree sepamted both
fhan the legislative and also ft-om the execu-
tive power. Were it joined with the legisla-
tive, the life, liberty and propert^r of the sub**
ject would be in the hands of abitraiy judges
whose decisions would be then regulateid^aly^
by then- own opinions, and not by any fiioda-
mental principles of law; which, though: lo»

g'slators may depart from, yet judges aier
>und to observe.''*

Far fie it from me, in any raspectto quea-
tton the right of the House of Commons to
aocose, the riglUof the House of Commons

•^m

• 1 Bla, Com. f69.

657]

•11 ii0 Mm^M ComtikAion*

A. D. t796.

[SSd

to Mipe«cb, tte fight «f Iki Houae of Cmiw
iBOBftlOiContnDilsiMlii^inniiie the aoodiict
mitnwry bnoeii 9i Ibe ciecutive toveromeot
and the ormduct of evwy indiviauBl in the
totios. But mhmthBydo muamtf imhuni
to you, that the ciramataoooflf ito Wios aa
aacHflaikm of thcan^ onght aoft to woigii ia
tbejudgmeolof tboie, mnoAi^ faally to de«
^do upoB it ; Vooause if it did» ao aoana4ion
nada not uoon oath« or parted behind the
back of the defendant, and where he has no
opiportiniiiy of beuig heard, awidd then ope-
Me loiveiKh bias down, when ha is brought
to bit tnaloefore a Jury of his country.

The Hoota of CanHnona oie not infallible ;
tbe.Ho«ee of CoBunom jnay voMibly, apon
auk^ts where their own 'prtvilegaa are con-
aerned, be liable lo mistake t are do not want
the eiqperiaoea of many years to oonrinee «it,
that in proseautioBa eonducted by them open
the beat priaciplea, with the best notices,
ynd tlie beal intentions, tba House of Com*
9MMM have been nltimalely found, in the
coarse of prosecutions which they have been
for years conducting, to h«ve been mistaken.
Therefore it is, that I take the liberty of lay-
ii^ this topic eniirdy out of your considora-
lion. I anaU exainuie this oharn by itself,
without Any reference to the authority limn
which It proceeds, being perfactly persuaded
tliat you will not aufo this topic to opmte
in the least upon yeur miads. GentlcnMu,
i^gaina groBtdeal has been eaid, eloqnentiy
^nd ably said, in defence of the constitution of
this country, and in partiankr of thoneoessi^
of the freoueut boldwg of parliameots^-that
the vary me nnd spirit of thecenatitulion is at
stake, if that ptncipk be not upbeU^^-^nit
the wbol6 fraaiain of this liaiiled monarchy
(fepends upon it Much has been ably and
docfuently said upon it.-^I subscribe to every
iNMd of tt-^I a» instructed by Hn Deleodant
to sa^, be subscribea lo eveij word of itr^And
Ideiy you to foint out, in feir eonalruetion,
an^ loanable in this pamphlet, tbit is neant
lo iiopcaoh tke amUituHm a$ aiaUitked lo
/e«>^Tho constitution consiatinc, as we all
knew it dees, by law, of a lagisStare in the
Kine, lisrda, and Commons; and when we
spcM of Ike government established l^ kw,
we must be understood to speak of that oon*
sjitttlioo. And I will nudutain Uut this pam-

£)et which b now the aubjed of accusation,
dead of meaning in any respect to arraijsn
this constitution, ts throughout, from begin-
ning to end, cakulaled to protect, to uphold,
and to support it

. I am persuaded, if you examine this pam-
phlet fairljr, you will see that it is written bv
en enlhusiadtic admirer of the Bnglish consU-
totiuD, bjf one who is labouring bard to show
its superiority and pre-emmenee over every
other that exists ; to ffuard it against the pos-
sible attacks of ill-migning men^of those
Republicans and Democrats, who, the writer
suspects, tnrevail in the ooun^, and who are
vMffiking their way to K^ and updienniaft this

glorioni eoiislilnlisaso liappii^ estalilisbed bf
the law ofthe land. It is evident irom tho
whole irame and tenor of the pamj^iilet, from
the beginningto the end of it, that it iswiittea
by apenoD waBBDiyottaohedtothatcoostiCU"
tianand who is doing his best in support of it
Whether be has executed that puipoae ably,
wbedier he has executed hiadesign judiciously,
whether he may net in aome parts have ex-
pressed himself inoocurately or imperfectly,
my learned friend with the candour wldchdeeo
him great honour, saya, is not for your deoi*
ston. — He admits tliat if yov really see the m-
tent of the author to be good, to uphold and
net to destroy the oonstituiseny to wphoM H
agsinst all invaders and cirery one who menno
to shake any bimch of it or any port of it, te
that case my learned friend adcsits the de-
fendant is entitled to your widkti

Gentlemen, again permit ma to advert lo^
another topic m my learned frioiid*k ad-
dress to you, in which he has gone, «t very
gneat length, into many parts of this pamphlet
which Are not now the snfoieots of aocosadon.
-^But I hold myselfbound to confine my at-
tention to that wbieh is made matter of ao*
cttsatioD before you.— To vu at tov arb aouim
ID ooKnira rooa vaaaicT.

I do not mean to say, that other parts of
the work may not be adduced aa context to
explain the part thai is the subject of aecusa*
Uon; but I take the liberty of aayinc, that iF
in the comments which the author ma made
on the Reformation, or Itei^ution, or any
other publk wtnts that are occasionally dis*
cussed in the course of the pomphliA, there bo
thoughit to be anything reprehensibfe or im-
proper either in sentiment or expresskm,
they are matter of substantive charge^-*
Th^ might hawebeen made so, but thcj are
not

My duty will be to stale distinctljf, what Is
the onW part of this pamphlet that is now se-
lected lor inquinr, and to that I shall direct
my defence. But, gentlemen, permit me
oiuy just to aav, in answer to all those obser-
vations made by mv learned friend, as if Mr.
Reeves had treated the revolution disrespect-
fully, because he quarrels with the term Ho*
vokdwu; and what he calls a mistake of Mr.
Reevesi to say that the Revolution did not
properly pass under that nauie, whereas it
nao been so denominated in legal proceedings
and therefore it could not be said to be an
improper term ; all which my learned friend
laboured at some length. To all this I answer,
that I will not enter into this dispute about
names : but I ask you, Aentlemen, is that
grsat event calumniated f Is that fenious pro-
ceeding,— whether it is called a revolution or
not, is perfect^ immaterial^— is that proceed-
ing censured in anv respec^^ <)uite there*
verse : the author has expressly stated; lihat
the RevolHtton was brousht about bj tfao
j^eattstandbeatmenoftaeage. He says, it
** was besught about by the energy, good seoM
and fiiMMes, of some of the best and greatest'

559] S6 GEORGB UI. Trial of John Rieves, Esq. for m LUd [560

men in the nation .'^ He speaks of it in page
40y as '' a precedent, that would be regarded
with reverence, and with gratitude towards
those who made W

He speaks of it, in another phbce, as an
Qvent of the highest importance, ^ most of the
errors and misconceptions relative to the na-
ture of our government, have taken their rise
from those two great events, the Reformation^
2pd what is called the Revolution." — " Those
memorable transactions were conducted in a
way that was trul;^ English; the actors in
them proceeded with their remedy as far as
the disease re^hed, and no farther ; and they
never suffered themselves to lose sight of this
main rule, that what they did was, to preserve
the ancient government^ and not to destroy or
alter it." p. S5.

Here then we are differing merely about
terms; tirhether what was done then ought
properly to be denominated a revolution, or
whether it was, historically and accurately
considered, merely a restoration of the an-
cient constitution of the land ; namely, that
nothing was then done, but to remove the
abuses, and correct the errors, which had
crept in, as the author says (p, 5S) in the
^ wicked reigns of Charles the second and
James the second ;'' but that all the rights
and privileges, then established to us, and
connrmed in the famous Bill of Rights
were only declarations of the ancient rights
and privileges to which the people of Eng-
land were entitled before the Revolution.
And, gentlemen, surely, if we were now
arguinff, on different sides, upon this ques-
tion, tnat man is the best friend to the
event of the Revolution, who fixes it
upon the basis of antiquity, who states it to
be conformable to our ancient system, and
our ancient laws; and contends that the
whole which was then done, was not any in-
troduction of novelty, but a restoration of
those valuable rights, to which the people of
England had been intitled from the earliest
times ;— These were then declared^ not then
enacted for thejirtt time ; — and he arsues well
p. 63, that James thd second was justly driven
from his throne at tliat time, because he had
broken his trust; if the law had not been so
before that period, he would have broken no
law, and of course no trust.

These, I say are arguments, not of a man
who is hostile to the freedom of hiscountry, but
of a man, who is only arguing against a term
and a denomination, because he apprehends
it may be abused to bad purposes. He says,
he fears that those, who recur so much to
this period, and make so much use of this
term, are not so fond of what was then trans-
acted, as they are of" Revolutions in the ab-
stract^" and that they wish to lay hold of the
term, to make it a precedent for any future
xevolution they may please to project. They
are fond of the term, and cline to the term ;
for that sole reason, it is, tnat he quarrels
mXh thetermi and endeavours to shoW| that

this event is no proper precedent for a revo-
lution that does not come up to the case in
point; and that the case in point, however
termed a revolution, was improperly so term*
ed, being, in truth, only a re-establishment of
what was the law before.

But, gentlemen, with respect to one obser-^
vation likewise, which was made upon the
author of this pamphlet, as having attempted
to calumniato the Bill of Rights, I must say
a few words. It is mvely supposed, that be-
cause in one part of it, he has spoken of the
Bill of Rights as consisting of twelve instead
of thirteen articles, it is, I say, gravely meant
to be insinuated, without any enumeration of
any particular words, — that the thirteenth in
particular was the very one which he meant
to exclude. Why so? He has spoken of
there being twelve articles, it turns out that
there are thirteen ; why are you to suppose
that any one article in particular more than
another was intended by him to be sup-
pressed ? Bat to obviate every possible doubt
upon this subject, I will only beg you to ob-
serve one passage in this very pamphlet itself,
to show wnether this is not mere verbal criti-
cism, resting solely upon an accidental inac-
curacy in the writer, who has spoken of there
being twelve, when, in point of fturt, there are
thirteen articles. He could have no intention
to mislead or misrepresent, when he has, in
page 51, expressly referred his readers (if they
want to know what was done at that time),
to the Bill of Rights, to see what was done ;
he has pointed it out to their particular atten-
tion ; he says, " Be it known, then, to all
those who have taken their comtitutional t»-
formatum from pamphlets and political socie-
ties, that they have not yet looked into the
right place for the history, nature, design,
and principles of this supposed Revolution.
But if they will read over statute the firsi of
William and Mary, session the second, chap-
ter the second, which is shorter than any of
the papers published by the societies for mak-
ing revolutions, they will find the whole
secret explained to them ; to which, if they
wish a little more light, they may add statute
the first of William and Mary, session the
first, chapter the sixth, which is still shorter
than the other."

Now, gentlemen, can it fairly be argued,
that this IS the work of a person who meant
to decry the Bill of Rights, or who meant not
to present his readers with a reference to the
best sources of information as to what was the
constitution? That this was not to be col-
lected from loose and inaccurate information,
but from the best sources, is what he is la-
bouring at from the beginning to the end of
his pamphlet, in order that his readers may
form their notions of the constitution as it
really is (as he expresses himself in p. 58) ** re-
flated by established and known laws. This
IS the only constitution ever supposed, or
named by men of Bober minds and sound
understanding ; that is, the conttUuim of tmr

561]

on the EtiglUfi Consiituliun*

A. D. 1796.

[562

ffovemmeMf or the comiUutum ^estahlUhed bif

iw.

Can it possibly^be argued, in fair construc-
tion, that this is not the language of a man
labouring in support of the constitution as
established by law, when he refers to the Bill
of Eights itself; when he refer« his readers
to the laws as the best, the surest, and
soundest sources of information, saying to
theray ** read these ; collect here your know-
ledge of the constitution ; this is what we are
to btand and fall by P" I trust, therefore, that
all minor observations upon the particular
phraseology of particular parts of this pam-
phlet» wilTgive way before a penetrating tri-
bunal which will see what is the true mean-
ing of the writer, and that he is labouring
in favour of the constitution as established by
Jaw*

The particular passage which is more im-
inediately the subject of inquiry to-day, is
<:ontained in pages 13 and 13 of Uie pamphlet;
and in decidmg this question, you will not
have to decide a question of general law, or of
general politics.

I will not. gentlemen, follow my learned
frieo<] into all the elaborate learning that he
lias produced upon this subject, to show m hat
is the constitution of this country. It is mat-
ter of universal notoriety. It requires no
lawyer, no book to be brought to teach us
what every man who reads, everv man who
vralks the street, knows to be tRe constitu-
tion ; namely, that },he whole legislative and
executive government of the country is vested
in the King, Lords, and Commons : that is
plainly and simply the known established con-
stitution of the country ; it is matter of uni-
versal notoriety; it is level to the understand-
ing of every man who walks ; and therefore
it is quite impossible to misrepresent it with
success, and it is unnecessary to go into any
detail of learning to prove* what every body
knows to be the case.

But it is imputed to this writer that he has,
in this passage, misrepresented the constitu-
tion in the particulars which the infbrroation
points out bv way of accusation -. it states the
passage, and puts a construction upon it.
We are here, therefore, gentlemen, simply
i>pon a question of construction. I admit dis-
tinctly, th{^t if in this passage, the author
could have the meaning which is imputed to
him, could have any intention to lay aside par-
liaments, and to vest in the king alone the
legislative power as well as the executive, I
admit the pamphlet to be a gross and scan-
dalous libel, deserving all thelnfamy that can
be suggested, and its author deserving the
severest animadversion and punishment which
the law can inflict upon a person, who shall
be madman and fool enough, to broach such
a doctrine in the face of his country.

The question, then, simply is— what is the
meaning of this passage ? and I undertake to
convince every person who hears me, who
comes here with an unprejudiced mind — lun-

VOL. XXVI,

dcrlake to convince every person who reads
this passage, comparing ii with the one that
precedes it, that it is quite impossible to under-
stand it, in the sense attributed to it by the
information.

The charge states Mr. Reeves to be a sedi-
tious ill-disposed person, greatly disaffected
to the government of the realm, intending to
raise and excite jealousies and divisions among
the subjects of the king, to alienate the
affections of his subjects from his govern-
ment, to destroy and subvert the true prin-
ciples of the constitution, to traduce, vilify,
and bring into contempt the two Houses of
parliament, — then come^ that which is the
foundation of all this charge, " With intent
to cause it to be believed, that the regal power
and government of this realm might, con-
sistently with the freedom of this realm as by
law declared and established, be carried on
in all its functions by the king of this realm"
— Now, gentlemen, permit me to call your
attention to the words which follow — " air
though the offices, duties, and functions of the
Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons
of this realm, in parliament assembled, should
be suppressed and abolished/' And in t^ie
next count it is to the same effect, though dif-
fering in words— " although the Lords and
Commons should in future never be assembled
in parliament."

The event, then, supposed to be contem-
plated by the writer, is, a perpetual abolition
of the two Houses of parliament, and ati asser-
tion, that incase the two Houses of parliament
were permanently abolished, the king alone
would separately possess every function, legis-
lative and executive. That is the ppoposition,
that is the doctrine fixed upon thispassaee ; and
unless that be the doctrine, it is incumbent on
you, under bis lordship's direction, to find
that this information is not proved ; you arc
therefore, to compare it with the work, and
sec whether tbat accusation is made out or
not.

Gentlemen, the first observation that I have
to make upon the passage which is selected, is,
that it begins in the very middle, or rather to-
wards the latter end or that part of the work
which treats upon this subject. You will ob-
serve that the very first line of it purports to
be an inference from what had preceded it,
for it beeins " With the exception, therefore,
of the advice and consent of the two Houses
of Parliament," — obviously referring to an
antecedent discussion upon the same subject,
and being plainly nothing more than an infer-
ence or result from something that had pre-
ceded it. Surely it is but fair, in examining
what is the true intent and meaning of a writer
in a particular part of his work, to look at
that passage which precedes it, becaiise it
clearly imports a direct communication with
it; yet the whole of the argument on I he
other side has entirely proceeded on the fal-
lacy of fixing upon certain specific words, re-
moved from their regular cmmevionf and giv-

^ O

563J 36 GEORGE IIL Trial of John Reeoa, Esq.Jbr « Libd [§64

ing to a metaphorical eipression a literal
ineaning — fixii^giipon a general expression
in a passage where, as you will pretently
see, the extent of the king's poWer >vas not
the subject of discussion, and giving to such
ecneral expression the utmost possible effect,
leaving at the same time wholly unnoticed all
the specific doctrines upon this very subject,
Whicri are stated expressly by the same writer
in the passages that precede it.

Gentlemen, the writer of this pamphlet is
accused of having misrepresentea the nature
of the English government. The discussion
beeios in p. 0, and soes down to p. 13; the
subject is particularly discussed in those inter-
vening pages ; surely it will be but fair to take
^he whole, and examine it altogether; and'
I trust you will agree with mc, that the rules

!! am now about to state, as applied to a subject
ike the present, are fair rules in determining
upon a question of libel or no libel.

First, that if a passage is capable of receiv-
ing two meanings, one of which imputes to
the writer a doctrine that is in itself absurd,
ridiculous and illegal ; and the other of which
"will contain doctrine that is consistent with
law. consistent with reason, and consistent
witn the principles of common sense, that
then the latter sense is to be adopted in pre-
ference to the former.

. Secondly, it is a fair rule of construction, if
a particular passage is capable of receiving
two senses, and one of those senses is inconsis-
tent with the opinions of the author, express-
<ed in unequivocal language in another part
of his treatise, while the same passage^ taKcn
in another sense, will be consistent with the
opinions of the same author; that then, bv
h\T construction, that sense is to be adopted,
which makes the whole work consistent, and
not that which makes one part of it inconsis-
tent with the other.

Another rule of constniction, is, that where
there is in one part of the work, a general ex-
pression capable of being applied to collateral
incidental subjects not then directly the
^int under the writer's eve and,consideration,
which pressed in the full extent, may subject
him to imputations of the sort I have alluded
to. opposea to other declarations not of a gene-
ral nature, but express, precise and positive
declarations of the same writer, when the direct
whject ii under ccwtemplotion ; that then we are
to timl out the sense and opinion of the writer
by referring to the express, rather than to the
general declaration upon l^e subject

Now. gentlemen, taking all these rules in
aid in the decision upon the present subject as
)i question of construction, I undertake to show
you, that by every rule that ever was adopted
for construction in any case, and much more
in a Criminal case, when you are to decide
upon the question libel or no libel, and to sen-
tence this gentleman to all the dreadful con-
sequences, which will follow, if you pro-
nounce him guilty in the way sought by this
infj^anation; if I can show you, upon evei^

principle, that the sense t am contending for,
IS the true one, I am persuaded that then you
will have no difficulty in yoar verdict.

I will now state to you, gentlemen, the
sense which I put upon these words, and
then you will compare and examine it with
the passage; and you will see whether it is
not quite clear that that was the meaning of
the writer. I insist upon it, that fn the pas-
sage under consideration, the anthor was
speaking of the kingly government in all
those functions that belong separately to the
king, as being the Executive pow.er in the
state ; and it is not disputed in point of law,
if that is the meaning, that it is no libel to
state, that the king does possess all the
functions that belong to the executive
power.

In the next place, I insist upon it, that the
passage will be found, in speaking of the
cessation of parliament, to speak df a tempo-
rary cessation only, and not at all entering
upon the question which Mr. Attorney -Gene-
ral has supposed imputable to this author —
that he meant to insinuate for what length
of time parliaments may be suspended, or in
any respect meant to contend, that when they
are suspended^ the legislative functioas belong
to the king.

Permit roe. in the first place, to snppose
that the detacned words, separately consiaered,
may admit of a contrary construction, —
that if I pursue the metaphorical expression
of a branch lopped off, -it may be applied to
the perpetual suppression and abolition of par-
liaments altogether— that if you are to press
to the utmost possible effect a metaphor (aa
injudicious metaphor if you please), it may
besr this meaning ; but surely it will not l>e
said, that you are to construe a metaphor ex-
actly in the same way in which you would con-
strue a treatise not expressed in metaphorical
language; some little allowance will, in all
cases, be made for men who go out of the
common track of plain writing, and indulge
therosclves in metaphorical expressions. You
would in this passage do that, if it st(A>d un-
explained by the context ; but I trust you vrill
presently see, that I am not contending for
any thing, which a fair reader of this will not
see to be the true intent and meaning of the
writer. I am not arguing, whether the ex-
pression, " The kingly £tovemment may go on
in all its functions,'' taken by itself, might not
admit of some ambiguity, whether it Was not
meant to comprehend legislative functions as
well as executive. But when we want to find
out what is the true intent and meaning of the
writer, are we to determine it simply by a ee-
neraly or by a metaphorical expression ? If flie
writer had not introduced it by any thing that
is explanatory {^i it, perhaps you might have
said. <' He has expressed himself at least incor-
rectly, when speaking of the kingly power;
but if he has preceded the^ ^nenX expiel-
sions, and tnetaphorical expressions, hy liito-
guage which admits of tib possible dodbt cfr

II

fi(|5]

OH {he Englkh ConsiUution.

A. D. 1796.

[566

Hii^repre^Qtati^)}, px\f\ ixox^ which it is im-
passible \o cqqceive, th^t this writer meant tp
prop^li? thp doctrine, that the kino; could
mal^e i9>w» without the two Houses of paflia-
wept, or do any one act of legislation without
the two Houses of parliament ; then it is im-
possible to suppose that he could intend to
prqpagate a doctrine of that sort, which mili-
lat^S with hU own proposition, immediately
expressed in tt^e precedmg page,"

Gentlemen, the passao^es tnat I rely upon, arc
those in which he has olscussed this subject of
the extent of the kind's power ; and surely if we
wanted to find out the sentiments of a writer
with respect to the king^s power, it would be
but reasonable to exaqpine what he has ex-
vressed, when that subject was directlv under
Ills consideratioD ; and you will find this sub-
ject of the English government is treated of
«n this manner : First he d^nes the extent of
the power the king possesses, and the quali-
fications which, by law, are imposed upon it ;
he follows that up by contrasting the nature of
the executive government possessed by the
icing, in pointoTperpetuity of existence, with
ihe temporary existence which belongs to the
other two branches of the legislature ; then he
forms another subject of contrast between the
Icing's power, and that vested in the other
branches of the legislature, inasmuch as their
pow^r is (ierived from the crown, but the king
IS independent. You will find, it you examine
the passage, that the subject of the extent of
the Kine's power v&fir$t discussed and disposed
of; ana in this place it is that we shoula find
it, if the writer meant to insinuate that the
))ower of the king in point of .extent was a
power to makQ laws without the two Houses
of parliament.

Now, eentlemen, he has declared himself
directly the reverse ; he has, in the most ex-
press and clear manner, declared (o all the
people to whom this subject was addressed,
that the king cannot enact laws without the
two Houses of parliament; and I will, in
order to ascertain this, beg you to judge if it
be possible to put a different construction upon
the language of page 11 : — <' Accordingly,
tt^ie king can enact no laws, without the advice
and consgntf not only of the Lords Spiritual
afuf Temoralf who are in some sort counsel-
lors of his own choosing, but also of the
Commont in parliament assembled.'^ Is that,

tr ,b it not, the language of a man, who meant
> assert th^t the king alone could make
laws, without the concunence of the two
Houses? C/EiQ language express the reverse
more dearly than ;^his does ? If there are
an^ expressions to lie found in any work upon
this subject, more emphatic and clear tnan
these are^ I desire that they may be stated ;
for ][ ^m ^t a I098 to conceive any where the
vn^ier j^ ^9,ce plainly negatived and obvi-
9\i^ 'Wp p^hle imputation of meaning to
^X0fiW W^ ail independent power in the
t^gt to make laws without tne two Houses
01 parliament; unless we are to determine

things by their opposilqs, and, because a man
sajs the king cannot do it, you are, therefore,
to impute to hini, that he meant to assert that
he could ; for the information means to assert
that the writer declared, that the ting could
make laws without the two Houses of parlia-
ment, when he has expressly declared, that
he cannot make any laws withoqt them.

Now, this is upon a subject where expressly
he is considering the extent of the king's
power in the first branch of it; in page 9,
after having, in the precedino; paragraphs,
commended highly the people of England fqr
their attachment tp their limited monarchy —
for their attachment to the ancient constitu-
tion as established by law ; after having ex-
tolled them for their good sense, manifested
in their sense of the happiness and the pros-
perity they enjoyed under this mixed moo-
archy — that they enjoy all that degree of li-
berty which is consistent with public order
and Dublic hanpiness ; thus commending the
people of England for their attachment to the
constitution as it is; — He then proceeds to
state, first, thelaree power that is vested, se-
parately considered, in the king ; he then adds
the qualification, that by the just jealousy of
the people of England, and by thq wisjdoni of
our ancestors, has been imposed upon that
quantity of power which is invested for wise
purposes in the king, — but he is not left to ac^
imcontrolled, in which case it might be dan-
gerous to the liberties of the people, but re-
ceives those rational limitations, those modi-
fications that the wisdom of our ancestors has
framed in our mixed monarchy, which, whilp
it provides for all the energy, all the vigour
and dispatch, that belongs to the most abso-
lute monarchy, at the same time affords, by
those modifications and qualifications, tl^(b
best security to the peo]>le for the liberties
they enjoy, puhlic ana private. He has ex-
pressly, then, in stating the power of the
king, and the qualities and attrioutes that the
law gives to nim,— having first stated that
which I am persuaded wilfnot be cavilled at.
because he h^s expressed hin^self in one part
that the kin^ makes and executes the laws,
that he meant in that part to assert that h^
could make laws by himself— we know it is
the language made use of, that the king makes
the laws bv and with the consent of the tw^
Houses of parliament, surely yoii will not
quarrel with the phrase, because, in the pas^
sage immediately subjoined, he states how and
under what modifications he makes them; and
he adds, when he says the king makes and exe-
cutes the laws, '' These are the original and
main principles upon which the plain English-
mi^n, iuU of honesty and confidence, thinks he
may rest for the protection of his person and
property. But human institutions will swerve
from their original design, and Englishmen
will not always confide ; jealousies and fears
arise, and those must be appeased.'^

Now, gentlemen, attend to these words ;
" The reasonable jealousy of an Englishuiaii

567] 36 G£ORG£ III. Trial of John Reeves, Esq. for a Libel [568

sterns to be fully 8attB6ed, when a <)ualifica-
ticm is annexed to the power in the kin^* first,
of makingj and secoudly, of executing the
Jaws' — Is that contending for an unqualiRed
jiower, as this information charges he does ? —
•^ by which his subjects are admitted to parti-
cipate in a share of those high trusts/' Does
bespeak of those with disrespect? does he
speak of them as sometbing^ he wants to get
nd of? No ; he is commending the constitu-
tion and this very part of it. He says, first
that we have provided for all the strength (by
the power we give to the king) of a govern-
ment; and next, we have provided for the
security of the liberties of the people, by the
proper, reasonable, and just modifications and
qualifications, which are annexed to the king's
power, both of making and of executing laws :
then he subjoins that observation, ** Accord-
'°g'y> t^c I^iog can enact no laws without the
advice and consent, not only of the Lordt Spi'
ritual and Temporal, who are iu some sort
counsellors of his own choosing, but also of
the Commons in parliament assembled.^* And
then, t<^show how very little founded is the
charge, that he meant to insinuate any thin^
disrespectful of the House of Commons indi-
vidually— he h^s eone on, in that very para-
graph, to speak of the House of Commons
witfi the highest possible respect and venera-
tion, to show how safely the high trust that
is reposed in the House of Commons, may be
continued in theip; because, be observes
there, that even in the choice of the House of
Commons, the people have not confided it to
ttheir being chosen by the community at large, I

in th^ clearest, plainest language, stating in
the very page the qualification t He is ex*

f»ressly statmg the proposition which my
earned friend has stated, and which is arieht
and correct proposition, that is to say, that
the king is to have the advice and consent of
both tlie branches of the legislature; and he is
here stating again, as a summary from it, ** In
this manner is the power of the king qualified
in the making of laws." Then he goes on to
state the other qualification. " His power in
executing the laws is qualified by joining grand
and petty juries, in the admmistration of
justice, with his judges. To these two con-
trols on the power of the king,'' — There a^in
he enumerates them as properly existing
controls.

But, gentlemen, that is not all. The con-
trol of juries in the execution of the law, he
justly points out, as constituting one part of
our valuable constitution, in addition to the
check imposed by the concurrence required of
the two branches of the le^slature in the
making of every law : In addition to that, he
points out that very control which, as the at-
tornev-general has stated, exists with so much
benefit and effect to preserve the liberties of
the people of England, ** To these two con-
trols on the power of the king, must be added
a principle, which gives the nation another
security for the due exercise of tlte kingly
power; for though the king can do no wrong,
vet if wrong is done by the application of the
king's power, as he never acts without advice,
the person wlyi advises such application' is
responsible to the law*'' Then, gentlemen.

** but they are the knights, citizens, and bur- | all the adviacrs of the king— those whom he

g;esses, who are respectively chosen in coun-
ties, cities, and boroughs, by persons of sub-
stance and sufficiency, who may safely be
trusted with the exercise of a charge where
property is in question" iSurely, then, it
will not be said, that this writer meant, in
.any respect, to censure or to speak with dis-
respect of the House of Commons ; on the
contrary, he points out their peculiar fitness
for the high tiust reposed in them from the
peculiar caution with which they are elected
;^nd sent to parliament; he points out the
manner of their election ; " Knight$, Citizent,
and Burfeuetf who are respectively chosen
in countieSf cities^ and boroughs, by persons
of substance and sufficiency." There is not
any one of the paragraphs, which speak of
the king's power, that does not contain a
qualification, excluding the sense imputed to
the defendant by this information.

The very next paragraph begins, " In this
manner is the power of the king qualified in
the making of Jaws." Does that mean an un-
qualified power of making laws? No; he
says, in tliat manner it is qualifiei.1 ; how f
Why, by the two Houses of parliament; that
he can if^ake no law without them. Can it
|hen possibly be said, thit he has not here

ebploys, even in the executive government,
are amenable to the law : they can be ame-
nable to no other, whether prosecuted by the
kine individually, bv a private subject indivi-
dually, or by the Commons collectively, by
way of impeachment ; they are all responsible
to the law, and by the law only must they be
judged, whenever they are accused, before 4
tribunal erected by law; they must be judged
by the established law of the land.

All these observations upon the extent of
the king's power, are summed up in the firat
sentence selected for accusation m this infor-
mation; and it is the corollary, the conse-
Guence, and the inference that follows from
tne doctrine which the author had before
explained and illustrated ; he states this as 4
consequence from the preceding observations,
in this very paragraph ; ** With the exception,
therefore, of the aavice and consent of the
two Houses of parliament, and the interpo-
sition of juries; the government, an 1 the ad-
ministration of it, in all its parts, may be
said to rest wholly and solely on the king, and
those appointed by him." Is it not so, gentle*
men ? I ask any lawyer to state, wheUier that
is not truly the constitution ;— that; with the
exception here stated, the government does
.expressly contended, not for an unqualified \ rest, and the administration of it, in all its

^^c; to Mi^e l4w», but directly the reverse^

parts, does rest^ wholly and solely on the kingi

569j

On tk9 EtigUih Constilution,

A. D. 1796.

[570

ftnd those appointed by him. I therefore, in-
sist, that the doctrine here advanced, is the
true constitutional doctrine, established by
the law of England; and that, instead of its
being an assertion, that there rests an abso-
lute unqoalified power in the king, to make
laws as well as to execute them, on the con-
trary, in the very first sentence of the very
passage selected tor acaisation, is contained
an exception, which takes all the sling out of
it — which reduces it to a legal proposition,
when without it it would be an illegal one,
wbtcH makes it a qualified, and not an un-
qualified assertion; which makes it to be
a power subject to the control of the
two Houses of pariiatnent in making, and
of juries in executing the laws ; and, I there-
fore, maintain that the assertion in this
information, which imputes to the defendant
au intent to cause it to be believed in the
couiilry, that the king could carry on the le-
gislative functions without the two Houses of
parliament, is directly militating with the ex-
press decfaration of those precise unequivocal
sentiments set forth in the passage of this
yery work which immediately precedes and is
directly connected with the passage now under
consideraf%p.

I trust, then, if the writer has, in the first
part of his work, distinctly avowed, and un-
equivocally stated his opinions, you will, in
fairness, suppose that the author has not
changed his sentiments; if general expres-
sions m the pamphlet afterwards can be recon-
ciled with this, you will not believe that he
has altered his opinion directly, but that these
subsequent passages, if they are of a general
nature, and still more, if they are metapho-
rical, may be made reconcileable with the
sentiments of this author ; and that, at least,
you can never say— 'however inaccurate he
may have been in expressing his sentiments ;
you cannot lay your nands upon your hearts
and say, / heiieve that Mr. Reeves is ofapi*
nion that the king can make laws without the two
Houses of parliament ; wuen he has, in this

VERY WORK, expressly SAIO RE CANNOT.

If you convict'Mr. fteeves, it is for stating this,
that the king has the legislative power, with-
out the two Houses of parliament. How will
you then, with this pamphlet in your hands,
or how can any man breathing say, tiiat Mr.
Keeves had that opinion in his mind, when he
has directly, clearly, and unequivocally ex-
pressed the contrary ?

I say, therefore, gentlemen, that it is
hanging upon metaphorical expressions—
hahgingupon general exprcsnion^-^in a part of
this very passage, and not giving the party the
full benefit of these clear and unequivocal
expressions which are not liable to any possi-
ble misinterpretation, which are not exjrressed
in metaphor, which are not couched in ge-
neral words, but are in precise, positive, and
express laneuage ; and it is clearly admitted,
that if that DC the doctrine, it is free from all
^xoiption; H is the law of the. land, the

constitution of the country, and God grant it
long may remain so. I insist upon it, there-
fore, that Mr. Keeves in staling this, has
stated no more than what it is ttic right of
every person to state to be the constitution of
the country, as established by law.

Now, gentlemen, let us consider, whether
all that follows is not clearly and fairly recon-
cileable with what I have stated. I do not
mean to say, whether it might not have been
still more clearly expressed; that is not the
question ; we arc not in a court of criticism ;
we are not before a jury of learned men, who
are to sit and prove every sentence, and to
sa^ whether it is so well, so clearly and une-

Suivocally expressed as the best writers with
ue deliberation might have expressed it;
but you are to decide in a matter of crime,
and to say whether you do not perceive here
throughout, whatever ambiiruity may be
thrown upon general or met^pnoncal expres-
sions, whether you cannot discover what was
clearly the intent and meaning of the writer
of this pamphlet. The subject that follows,
I submit to you, if you will have the goodness
to advert to it, you will find to be this : —
Having ended (as I conceive he clearly does)
at the words '* and those appointed by him,*'
the discussion upon the subject of the ex-
tent of the king's power; having deliver-
ed his sentiments upon that, he then takes
up another point of view entirely; he
considers the king contrasted with the two
Houses of Parliament, and he shows the su-
perior permanence given by the law to the
king in one or two instances. First, he shows
a circumstance belonging to the kine which
does not belons to the two Houses of parlia-
ment, namely, his perpetuity :-»and here the
question is not for what length of time one or
toe other may exist, but he is forming this
point of contrast ; our constitution, says he,
IS composed of three parts. King, Lords, and
Commons ; the extent of the power of each
he has before defined ; he then takes them
separately, and compares each with the other;
and he observes, that the king compared with
the House of Lords and House of Commons
in parliament assembled has this attribute
belonging to him, which does not belong to
both or either of the two Houses of Parlia-
ment, namely, the unceasing continuance of
the executive power ; but that they are ad-
juncts subsidiary and occasional, juries and
parliaments are ; they do not exist through-
out the year; they do not at all times of tne
year exist; they do not constantly exist;
there mav be intervals in which they do not
exist. I believe the moment in which I aiti
now addressing you is an interval of that sort,
when no parliament at all exists,* subsequent
to a dissolution and before anew parliament is
called. That is not the case with the king ;
the king's power is unceasing ; the king, in

' * A dissolution of parliament took place on
theday of this trial.'

$7}] 36 GEQRGB III- Trial ^Jghn fttfw^ S^-Jira Libel [579

point of law, li can9)4«r«d ai mver d^ing ;
nil ppHtioil cb^rafi^r never oeasen for a ipo*'
mepty and the actual axis^QQce of the exfticu^
tive p^war v^tfd io tha king ia a coosiant
^xUteoce of a uoiform never-ceasioff opera^
tion : it;s a iprt of ppwar which calUTor daily
€X0rtioa» hacause io the kine is vested aU the
protection of the laws aua liberties of the
xealm; the exacvitivo powers of the i^ing axe-
cute the laws io every branch of them ; ail
public matters foreign and domestic are daily
conducted by Uia Jung aod those whom he
employs; aU the branches of the execuf
live government ara wholly vested in the
king, the making of war and )ieace<^tha ad*
ministration of justice in all iu parta-^r^he
conduct of our fleets and armiea-^the execu-^
tive government iu all its branches is wholly
vesttti in the king; and the House of Com<-
mons and the House of Lords have no part as
actors in that.

My friend said that they [the Houses of
Lords and Commons] have aright-~they un«
questionably have, to examine, to animadvert
%ipoa^ and in that «a^ to control, bv their ad«
vice-^to animadvert upon the cpnduct of the
kingaod those whom he employs : but they
Deveract in the executive government; they
may, by addressing the king, advise ; but, by
the established constitution of the ccuntrv,
the whole executivegovemment is completely
vested in the king, and that power which is
yesied in the king is called for every day,
every hour, every moment, and if it were to
cease to exist for a momeut there would be
an end altogether of all the machipe of go-
vernment; we should be totally without a go*
vernment (constituted as ours is) if we were
without a kix^. If there could be an inter-
piissionof the regal power^ all those branches
of power which are yesied in the king would
cease, and the machine could not go on ; but
it is not so with respect to parliaments, be-
cause in the recess, when the parliament is
pjrorqgued (which in time of peace it often is
mr eight months of the^ear, m ordinary times
for six or four months in the yesr) the execu-
tive branch of the government goes on. And
IS there any thing in this said pamphlet mean-
ing in 9uy respect to impugn or arraign the
propriety of we frequent holding of parlia-
meats ? Has it any thins to do with it ? No.
We have only to consider that by the consti-
tution parliaments do not always exist ; the
nature of their power is |o make laws, and
axecute the other functions which bek>ng to
them, which are subsidiary in their nature
and occasional, and do not require a constant
ynceasing perpetuity of exiatence. But that
IS not the nature of the power vested in the
king; and therefoi^, what is asserted is per-
ftcUy true in point of fkct. It is the constitu-*
tion that the aing exists always ; the House
of Commons and the Hoiise d Ixirds do not
exist always ; they do not exist in a time of

ment of another ; there is an interval vrhen
parliaments do noteifist, when oi)e parliament
l^ lopped off, when that branch of the legisla-
ture IS cut off by dissolution there is a total
end of that parliament, and there then be-
con^es an interval when the only power that
does exist in the country, as is the case in
this very interval, the only power that does
exist in this country to protect the subject, to
execute the laws, to carry on all affairs foreign
ao() domestic is wholly vested, in all its parta
in thf executive government — namely in the
king. I am persuaded ^ou will see that that
i^ the proposition and the only proposition
that is contended fi(ir here.

You will observe^ gentlemen, that he has
coupled it upon thu subject with a familiar
reference likearise to juries : wil) any man say
that he meant to aijKue that juries ought not
to be frequently called, whenever the occar
sion requires it, because he has said that jut
rics are occasional and subsidiary to the king's
power in executing the laws t Does that mefui
to arraign the propriety of havine juries ; or
does it in any respect speak of the impro-
priety of having recourse to juries ? No ; but
be is only speaking of these sort of checks and
controls that occasionally exist, ifot alwaya
existing ; because, till you, gentlemen, wpre
summoned together and formed into a jury,
you did not exist as a jury, nor will you exist
as a jury collectively, the instant you are dis-
persed. But does the writer mean to say ha
IS against having juries in the country,, be^
cause he has saidtheyare subsidiary and occaT
sional ? and how can it furly be argued that
he does not mean the same with respect to
parliaments? He only speaks of them as not
m constant unceasing existence, contrasted
with the king's power, which necessarily ia
constant ancf unceasing.

He says, that the government of England
is a monarchy, and he now comes to examine
that : I hqpte it will not be said, Uiat it is in
any respect improper to assert that ; it cer-
tainly is a monarchy — a mixed monarchy — a
limited ana nualihed monarchy — how quali-
fied he has before expressed, but we surely'
have not yet forgotten that ; it is not quite
driven out of doors that we live under a mo-
narchy ; unquestionablv that is the nature of
our constitution ; surely it is no libel to as-
sert that the government of England is a mo-
9ai;chy. Then, pursuing that very familiar
metaphor which you know is adopted by all
piersons who write Mpon the nature of our
constitujUcm and speak of the Lords and Co\m*
mons as " a hrapch of the legislature*' (it is
the common familiar expression that we read
of in all hooks, and in common parlance it is
a metaphor that has crept into use) the writer
here has ^en up that metaphor, and baa
pursued it a, little in the expression upon thU
aubject ; taking up the idea of either House
of jParliament being a branch of the }egia)&?

diuolutioo^ in the interval b^kwean the disso- ture, which every writer has used without any
lution of one parliament a||ji|h» jCQftpmepca- ide^ of olfe^cei ha takes up the ^ea that the

578]

ott M* JSttffaA t\v;tritKitf*OR.

A. D. 17$6.

t5T4

iboMreH it th« Moek, thfe oHgHi, «n4 thai Hm
olbers hste spftltig firooi him ts the anttMit
iMdc ; tK>w that is MiotheT poiitt of tom^ri-
MA, that \ht moifarthv did not spHo^ cut of
the other two hrancnes of the legislaturei
Imt that they did 9^'vn% out of the mo-
Harchy.

That expk«ssioOy gentlemen, is comply
tnie in many senses of tb« %ord, — fib the ^rst
phtie, as a matted of histM'y and antiqaity.-^^I
do not mean now to trouhle you with a learn-
Isd disquisitioD which has |>uztled antiejuaries
upon uiis very subject, at what precise pe-
riod the Commons of Enghmd first had their
eiistence, which you all know has been the
subject of great disquisition between Tety
leuiied men. Dr. Brady and Mr. Petyt ; some
attributing it to Henty Srd, others to £d*
ward 1, and some to an earlier period doubting
about the precise origin of it. But the way iu
which, correctly speaking, at this time of day
we must 8p<»Lk of the two Houses of parlia-
ment as owing their origin to the kmg, is
this; the parliament is summoned bv the
kin^ they etist by the king's writ ; thekiug's
%rrit calls them into existence at this moment ;
not that he is not bound to issue that writ
within a gii^en time, unquestionably he is;
by the act ef parliament to which my learned
friend alluded, the king was bound to call atiew
parliament within three years ; he could not
suspend the existence of parliaments for a
longer period than three years; but how is it
then that they are caHed into existence T by
the king's writ ; that writ is addressed to the
electors, who are to return their representa-
tives to parliament, and the parliament then
meets. The narliament continues in existence
by the act or the king the executive power ;
for he has the power vested in him by law
to determine that existence whenever he
chooses ; whenever the public welfare reotdres
it, he has vested in him the pdwer, by aisso*
lution, to pnt an end to the actual existence
of the parliament in the first year of Its exist-
ence, hi the second, third, fouM, fifth, sixth
year, or any period of its actual existence. In
that sense therefore the parliament owes its
existence to the crown, besides its being histo-
ncally true that it was created originally by our
aneietkt monarchs ; they having called together
the tenants of the crown, having formerly
sent to cities and boroughs to seno a council
to advise the monarch upon matters of stale.
The same form is actually continued down to
this very time of day that parliaments are cal-
led into existence by the king's writ and exist
during his pleasure ; that is. during the time
the 'public welfare requires they should exist;
Tmt they are ^t all times during their exist-
ence convened, prorogued, or dissolved by the
executive power, and therefore derive, in that
sense, then* origin, existence, and continuance
from the monarcn as the stock. But then
weure to quarrel with one single'metapborical
expression; and it is supposed that, when ',
^pesdting^f those bronches^e ^d that Ihey

might bs topped oiT, Mr. beeves meoni te as*
sert that ttiey might properly and josfly be
suppressed and abolished for ever. That is
the inference. It is taking the metaphor, in
a literal sense, to tlie utmost pitch to which it
can possibly be pressed in point of sense,«^
** that they may be lopped off, and the tree fe»
main a tree still." Why, in one sense it is pei^
feclly true. When a dbsduliontakes'plaGe the
parliament is lopped off; the two Houses of
Lords and Commons are topped off; nay it h
farther true, if I choose to carry on this meta«
phor, though I hardly suppose that I am hem
to be defeMtn^^ precisely the exact applicatioii
of a metaphor m all its parts, which never waa
required of a writer in any case much less in
a criminal one, but I sav that it is true in
some respects that all their political oharacter
and existence is fmnihilated. aU that verr
House of Commons never can exist again; aft
the individuals who composed It, if they
should every one of them be returned again to
pariiament, they would not exist as the same
House, they would not exist as the same per-
sons in the same political character. I think I
hear my learned friend hinting that the tree,
aftet it has its branches cut off, shoots out
fresh branches; so here, when} the parHa%
meiU is lopped off by a dissolution, by cutting
off these branches it puts forth new ones, by
calling anew parliament; here are newbranch-
es that are actually ^iven it by a new parlia*
ment being called ; it is not the old branch ;
that is to suy, applied to the individuals, it
does not consist of the same persons ; but it
is that there is a new House of Commons cal-
led by the king's writ to unite with him as
the council that is given to>bim for managing
the affairs of the kingdom.

But, gentlemen, let me simpose for a mi-
nute, that this expression ^ lopped off and
east into the fire'' was capable of two senses^
namely, as applied to a dissolution of parlia-
ment, or as applied to the perpetual abolition
and suppression of it ; which of the two senses
would you adopt ? If you take it as applied to
perpetual abolition and suppression, then you
make the writer to assert that which Is ille-
jg^I, which is contrary to common sense, which
IS contrary to the known constitution of the
kingdom, which is contrary to the express de-
claration of the author himself in the passage
immediately preceding. If yon r'4)istrue it m
the sense of a temporary lopping off, in the
sense of a temporary ** dissomUon'' or that
temporary cessation of existence which arises
from a'* dissolution,^ then it is made consist-
ent throughout with all that l4ie writer him-
self has said ; then it is no libel, no erime; *it
is consistentthrottgheiit mid is assertog only
what is the constitution.

T^en, gentlemen, whdoh of the two senses
will you adopt ? As lairmen I address ynu,
and ask you whether It is possible for you to
doubt ^at he meant it In the latter? fmr
otliei wise you make him hspoonsisient wittu
iiimself, to tie asserlhig a doctrine disTery.

576]

36 GEORGE III. Trial of John Reevis, Esg.Jbr a libd [570

reverse of which he had been declariiig before.
I would^xidlyjust iDcidently ob&ervethat so far
from meaning in Ihis very passage to traduce
vilify, and bring into contempt the House of
Commons and House of Lords, he speaks of
them even in this very metaphor with respect ;
he speaks of them as, '' goodly branches of
the legislature, the Lords and Commons, that
at the same time give ornament to the tree,
and afford shelter to those who seek proteclion
under it/' He speaks of the king being
*^ shorn of his honours, ^ when, during the
dissolution of parliament, be is obliged to
carry on the government without it Is this
the language uf a person who meant to insult
the two branches of the legislature, or of one
who meant to speak of them with respect as
existing, and while they exist being goodly
branches, contributiije to the ornament of the
tree, to the utility uf the kingdom ; and (hav-
ing before expressed the necessity of their ex-
istence) because he lias before said that with-
out them the king can make no laws, there-
fore whenever the necessity does arise of
making laws and of raising taxes upon the
people, or any other thing that reau'u'es the
interposition of parliament; then ne can do
nothing without them of a legislative nature ;
and therefore it does cause a necessity for
instantly restoring those branches by the act
of the executive government— by a writ is*
suing A)r the purpose of convening them?
. Then he goes on to another point of com-
parison,, considering the capacity of the kin^
to act separately, which does not appl v to ei-
ther of the other two4)ranches of the legisla-
ture. . Now, here, the (juestion is not to what
extent.he can act; that is not the poinlimme*-
diateiy under discussion. But the primary
point of discussion h^re is, the capacity to act,
— a capacity to do sometliing which does not
belong to them ; and it is in uiat point of view,
and that only, I am persuaded, that you will
see he is here comparing the king with the
other two branches of the legislature. He
says that the king can carry on his functions
-^all those functions which he ha.H before ex-
pressed to belong to him separately, all the
executive government — he can carry on all
those functions without the Lords or Commons.
So he can. I assert now that he can carry on
all those functions that belong to the. kingly
cover nraent, which is the execution of the
.&WS in caA'ying on the government of the
kingdom ; that which, properly and correctly
applied to the subject, is imported by the
words used here, — ** the kingly government
can go on, in, all its functions, wiwout Lords
or. Commons" — or^in other words, the exe-
cutive ^vemroent can go on in all its func-
tions without Lords or Commons ; but it is
not true, vice vena^ that the Lords or Com-
mons separately or collectively can go on withr
out the king. He says, " Without the king
his parliament is no more;" because, they exist
only in parliament assembled ; they can only
|)e assembled by the king's power. As my

lord Coke says, he constitutes an essential
part of it. No act can be done by the parlia-
ment without him. They do not exist for
any one purpose, when the king is not in ex-
istence. We are not saying that the House
of Commons cannot form resolutions without
the concurrence of the king ; that is not the
point; but the assertion is, that if by any
means the kins ceased to exis^ there could be
no such thing By our constitution, as a House
of Lords and a House of Commons in parlia-
ment assembled. But he says that the two
houses of parliament may for a time cease to
exist, and yet all the executive government
may still lie carrieVl on, during that interval.
That is the point of contrast which the au*
thor makes i^tween the nature of the king's
perpetual, unceasing existence, and that tem-
porary, and subsidiary, and interrupted exis-
tence, which applies to the other two branches
of the legislature.

. Gentlemen, if there could lie any doubt
upon this part of the subject, as to what is
meant by sayine that the kingly government
may go on in all its functions without Lords
or Commons, the context of this verv page
explains it; because, if you observe;, this ex-
pression is not only controlled by what has
gone before, excluding the Icsislative puwer^
because he has expressly said, that he can
make no acts without the other two branches
of the legislature; but, if ;^ou look at this very
passage, it is clearly explained in a way to ob-
viate every possible misunderstanding, by a
reference to what is under daily observation ;
to all the king's subjects to whom this pam-

{>hlet is addressed, to all the people of £ns;-
and it says-:-'' It has heretofore aone so for
years together, and in our time it does so dur-
ing every recess of parliament."

Gentlemen, with respect to that as an his^
.torical truth, we all know, that formerly, in
point of fact, the king has acLually gone on
with the^overnment during a period of twelve
years (apd in some instances I nelieve of m^re)
without calling a parlianient. I do not say
that was constitutionallv.' and properly done;
but here he is only speaking of the^ac^ of the
f;overnment having actually . gone on. A nd
in speaking of the present times, he does not
say that it may do. so for years together, or
that he means to insinuate that it would be
right to intermit the calling of parliaments
for years together ; but he has in this place
stated that in the same manner in every re-
cess of parliament, the king's functions do go
oil without Lords and Commons. That esta-
blishes the position that he .is contending for
— thecapacity of the king to act separately
in certain cases, without the aid and assistance
of the other two.branches of the legislature.
Is there any thing exceptionable iu this doc-
trine? It i^ precisely the sense that isexpressr
ed by that very wriler, whom my learned
friend has. referred to — by Mr, Justice Black-
stone, in his.Commentjiries upon the Laws of
England. He says, (Vol. i. p« 150.) '' It is a

677J on the English Constitution.

branch of tho royal prerogative, that no par-
liament can be convened oy its own autho-
rity, or by the authority ot any, except the
king alone. And this prerogative is founded
tipon very good reason. For, supposing it
had a right to meet spontaneously, without
being called together, it is impossible to con-
ceive that all the members and each of the
Houses, would agree unanimously upon the
proper time and place of meeting; and if half
of tne members met, and half absented them-
selves, who shall determine which is really
the legislative body, the part assembled, or
that which stays away? It is therefore ne-
cessary that the parliament should be called
together at a determinate time and place ; and
highly becoming its dignity and indepen-
dence, that it should be called together by
none but one of its own constituent parts ;
and, of the three constituent parts, this office
<:an only appertain to the king : as he is a sin-
gle person, whose will may be uniform and
steady ; the first person in the nation, being
superior to both Houses in dignity ; and the
only branch of the legislature that has a
separate existence, and is capable of per-
forming any act at a time when no parliament
b in bemg."

Here you see, gentlemen, is the same doc-
trine; it is not novel; it is nothing abstruse;
the author is only speaking of that circum-
stance which belongs exclusively to the king
contrasted with the other two branches of the
legislattire, — that iie has the power to act when
the others are not in existence, but thei/ have
not th^ power to act when hk is not in exis-
tence : tliat is the whole of the doctrine con-
tained in this paragraph. Then, taking it
ftom beginning to end, what is there asserted
upon the whole of it but this; that in these
particular points of contrast, the king differs
firom the other two branches of the legislature,
in respect to his existence being constant and
theirs subject to interruption ; hi$ power to act
being a power to act without them, their power
to act being confined to the time when Ac is in
actual existence ? This is the doctrine of the
law ; this is the doctrine of this pamphlet.
Taken in this sense, it is innocept ; it is con-
sistent with all that has gone before ; it is con-
sistent with the best writers : but taken in
the sense which this information imposes
upon it, then it is altogether inconsistent, il-
li^l, absurd; all these consequences must
foDow, if you adopt that sense in preference
.to the one I have been contending for.

I shall only just observe that he sums up
all this doctnne, upon the nature of our go-
vernment with these observations; — (the
statins of which shows that he meant to con-
tend for nothing but the actual constitution
as it was, and not to contend for any change
which should be made in it) he says, ** Such
are the principles and constituUon of the
English government delivered down to us
from 6ur ancestors ; such they can be demon-
strated to be from the incontestiblo evidence

VOL. xxvr.

A. D. 1796.

[578

of history and records; and -such it is wi«lied
they should continue by nine-tenths of the
nation."

What is thQ constitution that can be proved
by records and by history incontestibly ?
What is the constitution that nine-tenths of
the nation wish to continue — not to be framed
anew, but wish to continue? What is it but
the constitution as I have explained it, that
the legislative power should continue to be
exercised (as it is, in daily exerci'-e) by tlie
King, Lords, and Commons ? — that the exe-
cutive branch should continue to be exercised
by the king alone, separately existing? These
are the ardent wishes of nine tenths of the
nation who love and admire their constitution;
but can it be supposed that nine-tenths of the
nation wish for theabolition of the two Houses
of Parliament ? Do they wish to vest all thfe
power in the king alone ? Is that the wish oa
nine-tenths of the nation, or can it be so staled
in this address to the people of England, tell-
ing them that the characteristic good sense
which distinguishes them above all other peo-
ple, in every other country, exists in their at-
tachment to their laws and government ? It
is supposed that Mr. Reeves means to tell
them that the king exists without the two
Houses of Parliament, and has the power of
making laws, and that that is the wish of
nine-lcnthsof you; — you are all wishing to
abolish the two Houses of Parliament, and to
make the kin^ absolute. Can such egregious
nonsense be imposed upon any man breath*
ing ? Can it be supposed that a writer, who
addresses himself to the *' good sense'* of the
people of England, who declares expressly he
could only succeed by his doctrine being con-
formable to tfie ** good sense'* of the people of
England, could mean to be so understood ?

He says, •* an Englishman loves liberty ;"
he speaks of **" his jealousy of power ;" for
which he commends him. Good God ! gen-
tlemen, can you then,believe, that when he is
addressing himself to such a people, he would
say that nme-tenths of them would be willing
to adopt this nonsensical jargon, tjiis absur-
dity which every man, woman, and child, that
walks the streets, would tell him he is a mad-
man and a fool for broaching — that the king
could make laws without the consent of the two
Houses of Parliament? There is not a child
that lisps that would not tell hiro it was rank
nonsense. Can it then be believed that this
writer, a gentleman well educated ; a gentle-
man, who has distinguished himself, upon all
occasions, by his knowledge of the laws of his
country; who has very early given a proof of
it, very much to the advantage of the profe^
sion to which he belongs in giving a " History
of the English Law ;" who on that account
has been selected as a person entitled to the
high offices in which he has occasionally
been employed ; can it be credited or believed
than any man fit for any place but Bedlam,
could possibly say, '* I address myself to the
good sense of the people of England, who love

2 P

5793 36 GEDEGE III. Trial o/JoIin Resves, Esq. for a Libd [560

]ibert;r, who are jealous of power, aivl so at-
tached, above all things, to their con-
stitution, that nothing can ever make thenx
^Uer or swerve, fro^ it; I t^ll yau all this,'
that nine-<tenth9 of you are desirous of maJ^iog
your king an absolute monarch, and of put-
ting an end to the Lords and to the Commons,
whom yoii yourselves elect; all the share you
hate in the government, you want to. de-
stroy ; you are desirous, nine-tenths of you,
that that should be the constitution of your
country."

Good God ! what cross absurdity, what
nonsense, and folly is this ! Not only so, but
he says that <* it should continue ;*' that
means that it should go on as it does, not
that it should be altered. But can any alter-
ation be greater than t^is, that in future the
king should no longer make laws by and with
the advice and consent of the Lords and Com-
mons in parliament assembled, but that he
should make laws without them P Can any
change be mater than that? Is that continu-
ing as it is r Is it not to alter it, root and
branch ; to make the greatest revolution that
ever was thought or heard of in this country ?
Can any man oe such a madman or a fool as
tu suppose that, in these days, when un-
doubtedly the current is running not in
favour of despotism, to suppose it possible
that he could succeed in this mad, wild, and
absurd attempt, to persuade nine-tenths of the
people not tnat it ought to be, but actually
IS so now, and has been so from all time ?
for he is not arguing upon what it ought to
be. It is. not theory, but he is saving in point

that Mr. Reeves did not know that the king
could make no laws without the two Houses
of Parliament? If he did know it, can
you possibly believe, that he could have any
motive for tellitig^ the people, that that was
the constitution which he knew was not^ and
telFmg tUem that it could be proved by history
and ekparience, and that so it was. believed
to be by nine- tenths of the people of this
country ?

I say, therefore, consi^er^d in that point
©f view, when it h^s this sort of sense im-r
pos^d upon it, not being written by a man
who "is seeking to establish any change in the
constitution, <Ji- who is fmdi;ig fa^lt with aqy
thing ; but addressing them, as he says in l^^,
outset, in (hat temper of mind, which is prb-
duced when We contemplate what ma^ b^
considered as the cause of all the happmess
we enjoy in this country; this is not the case
of a grumbling, discontented repuhlicap ; it
IS th^ language of a man, happy and cpn-
tented under the constitution und^r which he
lives : he says, I address yon in aJl that tem-
per of mind wUi^h results from contemplating
the happiness we all enjoy; he Is it^. every
part expressing his warm and"/ urgent wi;5a
that the government should coiitini^ as it is;

he says, that an Engliahtnan, '' knovF« the
value of what he possesses better tbaqi
lightly or hastily to wi^i for. a change, and he
dreads every change may he for the worse/'-
In every part of it, you will see that h(5 i^ de-
precating every new-fangled innovation^ or
attempt to innovate upon the constitution;
the whole drift and obiect of the pamphlet;^
from ope end to the otner is, to keep at a dis-
tance every attempt that can be made by
theoretical men, to mtroduce their fancied re-
formations into the constitution: tbinklagt
that the constitution under which we live, aa^
it is established by law, existing as it does by
the incontestible evidence of history and re-
cords, is the best constitution that ever was
framed by the wisdom of man, for the happi-
ness and security of the people.

Is that the language of a man who wishes^
to destroy the constitution of this country, to.
take from it that which constitutes its cha-^
racteristic excellence; namely, its being a Ih
mi ted monarchy, in which the great quantity
of power vested in the king is subject to the.
control of the two Houses of Parliament an4
juries ? this excellence of our constitution Mr.
Reeves, throughout, commends, extols, and
applauds the people for having uniformlv ad-,
hered to ; whom, in all the penods he alludes*
to, in all these different events he speaks of:
with commendation for having conducted,
them, with moderation, for having nojt dis-
turbed the ancient government of the coun-
try, but restored it. He deprecates their
being made use of as any precedent to over-
turn the constitution, and entreats us rather
to observe, that they were uniformly the per*
severance of a loyal and free people, to secure,
their rights and liberties, as they did at the
time of the Revolution ; and he says, these,
were glorious events, cojpdi^cted by the best
men of the kingdom — people, to whoni we
look hack with reverence, and with gratitude.
He speaks of these different periods, as prece-
dents, not to be made use of^ i^ the way that
evil designing men may make use of them,
to overturn the existing governnaent ; but, he
exhorts the people of England to continue
to be sensible of the blessings they enjiojit
under the government und^r which wenaye-the.
happiness to live ; to adgpt that^W ienskt end.
persevere in it, for which he commends ^leqp^;
and, throughout, he is contendii^ in every
part of it, m favour of the coiicistitution as ear.
tablished by law.

I say, therefore, g/^tlen(ien, construing t^if^
pamphlet, ancl this passage in particu^ in
the way that any person nojt in a court of jpse>
tice would construe a passage, by looking aX
the whole context immediat^y upon t^e sub*
ject which we a^e discussing^ namely, with.
respect to the extent of tne. ^^^ P^vver,
looking at all the sentiopienta of the wri^r»
upon that particulai: suhjept— taking it e^ all
the rules that I have taken the lU^i^ty or Tf-
ferring^ to^ which will operate upapubteclly^ iu
criminaJicases^ 1 trust you wiQn^Wlndiic^.^

Ml]

an the Engluh ComtUutioh,

A. D. 1796.

[582

proaoune^im guilty, if:^ ou are not thoroughly
jatiflfied, that tbe meaning of this writer was
what is imputed to him in this information. I
am ^rsoaaed you are men of honour and cha-
racter, and will tender the important and va-
luable interest which this gentleman has
at stake not to have fixed upon him the de-
grading infamy which, if you find him guilty
of the charge brought against him by this in-
IbrmatioDy is fixed upon him for the re-
mainder of his life— that of beine a disaf-
fected man, aAd labouring to sunvert that
constitution which his whole life has been
a|>ent in supporting.

Before you fix a charge of such weight and
ma^tude upon any one of your fellow sub-
^tB, you will carefully see, whether it is not
possible to put a difierent construction upon
tbe passage selected for inquiry. I have
taken the liberty of submitting my humble
•emiments to you upon it. I say, tmit taking
this passage m every way, comparing it
with what precedes, compearing it with what
Ibllows, comparing it with the spirit and
temper of the pamphlet in every part of it,
which was written by a person wishing to
support the existing government, there can
be no doubt but that this particular passage
is not criminal in the way in which it is stated
by the present information ; even if you should
disapprove of the manner in which this pas-
aage is in anv respect worded, yet that you
can have no doubt of what the real, true in-
tent and meaning of the writer was, and cdn-
Miuently can have no hesitation in giving
jwa veraict for him.

Reflt.

Mr. Attorney Gen^a/.— Gentlemen of the
Juty;^-It is due to tbe faithful discharge of
the very important duty which it is allotted
to me, this aay, to execute, to call your atten-
tfen to some remarks upon the observations
^hkh have been made in this case on tbe
part of the defendant

I should, itideed, very ill represent those
ffho have brought forward this accusation, if
H t^ere possible for me, in the situation which
t hold, to call upon you to give a verdict of
gmlty against any fellow subject, who has the
pAftectbn of that system of law, which this
mfermation ia brought to vindicate, upon the
ground of inaccurate expressions ; if vou were
M>1iged to fifnd that verdict by the heip of able
Mticssm, if I were to preSs you to convict the
defendant, because you were persuaded that
a ta^, or an ill-considered expression had
b^n Hsed for a good purpose, and that that
ffta all with which tnis defendant was truly
^XKt^ by this information. Gentlemen, I
fise aglitn to state, that I do no such thing t
t aisk your verdict upon these terfns, and

rB tmse terms onW; that your minds $hall
tonucientkuthf tak^ed^ thai the patsagh
itdUd tlh fUk inuftmdlidnf wat ushered into the
wcorid by the preunt dtfendantx tcUh some of
the intents charged in the iijfSreHt^ coattts of
thi§ information.

I But, I am obliged, gentlemen of the jufy^
! a^ain, very shortly, to mtarriipt the execiitioa
orhis lordship's duty, and your making deli-
verance between the prosecutor and the per-
son here charged—by desiring your attention
to what the charge really is; for ably, feci-
ingly» and constitutionally, as my friend has
executed this duty, he appears to me not
fiurly to have looked the real chtfi^ upon this
information in the face.

Gentlemen, the prosecution is, as I think
no man can deny, after what has passed, an
useful one; for no man can deny that the
prima facie meaning— God forbid that you
should therefore inter guilt — that the prima
^facie meaning of many passages in this book,
is at least so disputable as to call for a dis-
avowal of that prima facie meaning, for the
satisfaction of those who are intcrchled in the
true understanding of the constitution of the
country. When I state this to be the prima
facie meaning, I am not pretending to assert
before you — that is for you and not for me to
decide — that the real meaning is so obnoxious
to the true principles of the constitution.
But I will venture to offer this to your consi«-
deration, that though I agree with my learned
friend, that the dignity of an accuser must
never entrap the consciences of a jury, who
must ever remember that accusation and con-
viction are difierent things ; thotieh I agree to
that, I cannot go along with my friend in the
observation he has made upon a proceeding in
parliament, with reference to an accusation
which ended in an acquittal. The natures of
that proceeding and of this are perfectly dif^
fcrent. This is the case undoubtedly, of the
House of Commons, merely as an accusation,
in discharge of a duty, which one should sup<*
pose it was not very difficult to execute^ iii
discharge of their duty duly to consider the
import of the whole of this pamphlet, before
they came to this prosecution; that simply
duty they did execute, by the resolution tbe
terms of which I have stated to you.

The other case—a case of com plicated facts
— a case consisting of very different circum-
stances as it must necessarily be exhibited in
accusation, and as it must be exhibited in de-
fence—is a species of case, in which it very
naturally antf very probably belongs to those^
who attend to the (lutyof making accusations
with the most anxious care th^t they should
not make them upon loose and idle grounds,
to mistake what will be the tru6 result of the
matter which is to be examined into in conse-
quence of the accusation which they make.

Now, gentlcfnen, the charge here is this i
not that the king can legislate alone— but I
beg your attention to the words of this inform-
ation, and I beg yout attention to the words
of every coimt in this information, and then
do that justice between the prosecution and
the de^ndant which is due to the country,
and which cannot be due to the country unless
it is due to the defendant— the charge 16 ;
thai the ifiieM was,\o^auii^ it to be b^lievcfd,

683] 36 G EORGE III. Trial of John Reivet, Esg.for a Libel [584

go on in all its functions, without Lords or
Commons, may mean — cither that the king
might go on in legislation without them ; of
that He might 'go on in the exercise of his
executive power, without being bound to sub-
ject to the revision of parliament those who
are his advisers in the execution of that power*
I say, if the question be, whether that is the
meaning or not, the passages in this pamphlet
with respect to the Revolution, become
highly important indeed ; because, I must
submit again to your attention, that the great
principle asserted at the Revolution, was that
contained in the thirteenth article of the Bill
of Rights — ^That for the redress of thosio
grievaiices which had existed, and for the
amending, strengthenini;:, and preserving of
those laws, which are declared to be the birth-
right and inheritance of the subject, ^it is de-
clared as the great principle of our constitu-
tion, that parliaments ought to be held fre-
quently. There may be a considerable degree
of accuracy and truth in a passage which ha»
been stated with respect to . the theory and
practice of our constitution as it wisted before
the Revolution — that the laws of this country
were the birthright and inheritance of the
subject in the4ime of Charles the second, and
in the time of James the second, and in other
reigns prior to the Revolution ; but if there
were interruptions of parliaments for the space
of twelve years, what signify; the other secu-
rities that a British subject has for those li-
contempt (which in legal language means i bcrties which are allowed to be his, unless
ducc below its just standard in the opi- | he can inf^ure the enjoyment of those liber-

not that the king's power in legislation, but
that the regal power and government of this
realm (which regal power and government of
this realm consists, as you know, in a parti-
cipation of the legislative power, and in the
exercise of the executive power, subject to
the revision of parliament, with respect to the
conduct of those who advise; that revision
bein2[ one of the first duties as well as the first
privileges of parJiainenl) — that the regal power
and government of this realm mi^ht, con-
sistently with the freedom of this realm — that
ireedom which is asserted in the Bill of Rights
— as by law declared and established, be car-
ried on in all its functions'by the king of this
realm, though the parliament**should be sup-
pressed and abolished ; that is the first charge.
The second charge is, not with respect to
the king's power in legislation, but with re-
spect to the Jcing's regal power and govern-
ment as I have explained il ; that it might be
carried on in all its functions, though the
parliament should in future never be as-
sembled; with intent to cause it to be be-
lieved, that the holding of parliaments is not
essential to the exercise, according to the free-
dom of this realm, of any of the functions of the
king of this realm in the government thereof
— not confining it to his mnctions in legisla-
tion. And then there is another count to
which your attention will be, I apprehend,
also particularly due : namely, a count which
charges the author with an intention to bring
into cont( -'»•'• ' '»

to reduce below its just stanaard m tne opi
nion of the country), the power and dignity of
the two Houses of parliament of this realm.

Gentlemen, before I apply myself to trouble
you with an answer to the particular remarks

ties by the frequent assembling of parlia-
ment for the purpose of redress of griev-
ances, and for callrne the revision of par-
liament upon the conduct of those who are

my learned friend has made upon the passage entrusted with the constituUonal duty of ad-

which forms more peculiarly the subject of
the information, you will permit me to
take notice of what has been observed to you,
ivhen my learned friend stated, that I had
gone into many parts of this work which were
not made the subject of accusation, though
they might have been substantive charges ;
and he particularly refers to the passages I
stated respecting the Revolution. With re-
spect to that, I apprehend, it is some conces-
sion that we know what the Revolution is ;
and the language in this pamphlet, touching
the Revolution, it is represented might have
been made matter of substantive charge in this
information, if it is blameable ; but I think
it cannot be denied to me, that your attention
ivill be particularly due to the passages which
arc contained in this pamphlet respecting the
Revolution, if they so bear upon the passages
stated in (his information, as to satisfy your
consciences what was the true intent and
meaning of the author, when he published
the passages so stated in the information.

Gentlemen of the Jury, taking it for a mo-
ment that it may mean— I am not now as-
serting that it does mean, but that the passage
which says that tht kingly government may

vising the king in the exercise of his execu-
tive power ?

Gentlemen, I call your attention agaia
to the passages which have been selected and
observed upon by my friend. He says, ** Uie
term Revolution" which by the way Mr. Jus-
tice Foster did not feel it inconsistent with his
duty, sitting in judgment, to state to be " a
most auspicious period, when the prixx^ples of
liberty were well understood and most glo-
riously asserted :"* and my lord Camden, sit-
ting injudgment,feltno difficulty in usingtibe
term and in declaring that" the Revolution
restored this constitution to its first principles.
It did no more. It did not enlarge the liberty
of the subject ; but gave it a better security.
It neither widened nor contracted the founda-
tion, but repaired, and perhaps added a but-
tress or two to the fabnc.''']* One was a clear
unambiguous declaration, tnat for the purpose,
of carrying on the frame of the constitution of
this government, parliaments must be held
frequently; the Lords and Commops must
meet frequently. It is here stated^ undoMbt-

*Fost. 171.

t See Vol. 19, p. tQ68.

«85]

•91 iht English Constiiuiion*

A. D. 1796.

[586

cdly^ that " that event which was brought
about by the energy, good sense, and firm*
oesSyOf some of the best and greatest men in
the nation, was of a nature (unlike roost good
things) to be helped on by the concurrence
and approbation of some of the worst men
that could be found. But there was this dif-
ference between the two descriptions of agents ;
what was merit in the one class of men was
none in the other. Those who loved the an-
cient government, and knew the value of mo-
narchy, had great prepossessions to sacrifice
before they could take such a step, though for
the preservation of both, and though they
Juiew that on the preservation of both de-
pended then- laws and liberties. But the rest,
tvho had no partiality for monarchy, or who
were ignorant or careless of its value ; the
lUpubUcan the Pretbyterian^ and the SectO'
rtes, to whom may be added a long trun of
the abandoned and dissolute; nothing was
more easy to thftm than to join in any thing
that looked like successful rebellion. Those
who haled the very frame of the government
-could not but be pleased with the shock it
now received : some hoped that the change
might lead to other innovations; those who
had been used to pull down and destroy gladly
aaw a prospect of reviving their old trade ;
persons witnout a determinate object were yet
too much amused with novelty not to be on
the side of the authors of it

'' Whatever were their motives for joining
in the new settlement, the Repubiicantf Pres-
kyteriam and Seetariet^ did not fail soon after-
wards to urge their merit, and it must be con-
fessed not without some show of reason. It
jwas a fortunate crisis to them ; the^ now saw a
government which they had a hand in'rearinp."
Now, if the principle of the revolution be,
to assert for the subjects of this country the
necessity of freauent parliaments, I should be
glad to know wnether observations upon that
revolution are not fiurl v connected with the
passaee which is to be the principal object of
the observations that I have to make pre-
sently. It is, ^ to these men, and to this si-
nister desisn, we are indebted for the jargon
of which I nave just complained. They invent-
ed the term Reiolution^ to blind and mislead ;
and they have never ceased repeating it, that
they may put the people in mind of making
another." I think I am fully entitled to say
this, — whether more belongs to it is for you
to determine, — but I cannot help saying that
this mode of treating that great event m the
history of this country, is inconsbtent with the
true principles of that event. The other pas-
sage, which I before stated for vour attention
was this ; '< It has been vulgarly called. The
MevokUion; upon what authority I know
not ; it was not so named by parliament, nor
is it a term known to our laws." I forbear
any farther remark upon that; you have al-
ready seen how far it was known to par-
liament, how far it was known to our laws ;
And you ba?« seen that it lias been the/mxious

business of parliament and the law, to vindi-
cate the security which that event, so|termed,
gave to the subject and to the constitution
under which he lives.

Gentlemen, we are told, with respect to
the constitution under which we liv«, that
there are passages — and your attention has
been particularly called to one in pa^es 57 and
58 of this book, which I will take the liberty
of reading ; <* but the English government is
real and substantial ; we see and feel it : we
can take its height and its depth ; and we
know its movements, because they are regu-
lated by established and known laws. This
is the only consUtution ever supposed or
named by men of sober minds and sound un-
derstanding ; that is, the constitution of our go-
vernment or the constitution established by law,'*
But permit me to state, eentlemeu, that
this passage imports absolutely nothing, that
you can be satisfied in your consciences, when
you look to the other parts of this work, that
the author meant to represent to the public that
it was part of the constitution of our ^vern-
ment'-that it was part of the constitution
estabhshed by law — that it was according to
the freedom of the realm, as the Bill of Rights
expresses it, that the king should govern in
the manner in which this record has stated
he might ; always attending to this ; that the
king's government is to be divided, and con-
sidered with reference to that division, into
his share in the legislative government and
his power in the eatecutive government of the
country.

Then all these passages expressine^ appro-
bation of the constitution, I am bound to sub-
mit to you as amounting to no more than
this; that they are an ap])robation of the con-
*stitution such as this writer has stated th^
constitution to be, in pages 9, 10, 11, 19,
and 13 of this book : and the question is
has he or has he not, in the passages to which
I am now begging your attention, stated — not
as the matter now stands — but that the state
of the government,as established in this coun-
try, is such that, according to its true princi-
ples, the king can exercise the functions of
government without Lords or Commons? I
would beg your attention to the whole of this
passage ; for undoubtedly a man is to be tried
oy the fair sense of what he writes. He is to
be tried by that sense of it which men of con-
science and honour will say fairly and reason*
ably belongs to it ; and not to be tried by spel-
ling out senses or collecting a meaning by
criticisms, which might not anect his mind at
the time he wrote or published it Your con-
sciences are to be satisfied, that the meaning
which this record, in some or one of the
counts, has put upon this passage, is the real
meaning which the author intended to express,
and the real sense which the author meant to
publish.

He stales here, ** it is an hereditary king,
who b(»rs all the burthen of government,
who is endued with all the power necessaiy

537] S6 G EOfiG B III. Trial tfj<*n Reeves, Etq. /or m Libel

[S88

to famr it on, axul who enjoys all the honour
and pie-eminence necessary to give splendor
to so nieh a station. It is the king^a peace^
under which we enjoy the freedom of our per-
sons and the security of our property ;'* there
tVien follows a passage, and my learned
friend does me justice when he supposes I
would not forget a (Qualification which is sub-
sequent to it — but I call your attention to
this passage because it describes what the au-
thor conceives to be the functions of the king
*f htmaket^ and he executes the laws/' — bis
functions therefore, according to this repre-
sentation, are the makinc and the execution
of the laws. " These are the original and main
principles upon which the plain Cnglishmao,
full of honesty and confidence, thinks be may
rest for the protection of his person and pro-
iier^. But human institutions will swerve
from their original design, and Englishmen
will n<ft always confide ; jealousies and fears
arise, ^nd those must be appeased. The rea-
sonable jealousy of an Englishman seems td
be fully saiisfiedi when a 4)ualifieatton is an-
nexed to the power in the king, first, of mak-
ingy and secondly, of tjcecuting the laws ; by
which his subjects are admitted to participate
in a share of Uiose high trusts.*'

Now you will give me your attention, gen-
demeni to the qualifications as they are stat-
ed ; " Accordingly the king can enaU no laws
without the advice and coHtentf not only of
ihe Lords spiritual and teatparalf who are in
some sort counsellors of bis own choosin£,
but also of the Commons in parliament assem^
hUdJ* Permit me here to mention, that this
advice and consent is in this passage ex-
pressly confined to the enacting of laws, as
accurately and strictly speaking, it ought to
be. 'then it goes on to say, " In this manner
is the power of the king qusilified iu the irui^-
ing of laws. His power m executing the laws
is qualified by joining grand and petty juries,
in the administration of justice, with his
judges. To these two controls on the power
of Ine king, must be added a principle, which

fives the nation another security for the
ue exercise of the kingly power ; for though
the king can do no wrong, yet, if wrong is done
by the application of the king's power, as he
Bever acts without advice, the person who ad-
vises such application is" and I neg your atten-
tion to tlie expression *< responsible to the law."
Responsible to the law; as my learned friend
slates, responsible to the revision of the con-
duct of those who advise the executive go-
vernment; that revision to be made in the
exercise of one of the first dulies and privi-

leges of parliament
But,

gentlemen, is it possible that by the
words '' responsible to tne law/' this writer
could mean respoiisiUe to the revisiea of
^arliataient? And if he did not mean res-
ponsible to the revision of parliament,
as it respects the exercise of the execu-
tive ponder, this gives a construction i6 the
Ibllowi^g pOApi^s, ** With the eicepiioo

therefore, of the advice and consent of the
two Houses of Pteliaroent'' (an advice and
consent, which you observe is confined to
tlie enactment of laws and not to any control
of the king in the exercise of the executive
part of the government; it does not apply at
all to the revision of parliament as to the
conduct of those who are to advise the execu-
tive government) ** and the interpositioti of
juries : the government and the administraF*
tion of it in all its parts, may be said to rest
wholly and solely on the king, and those ap-
pointed by him. Those two adjuncts of par-
iiament and juries ate subsidiary and occa-
sional ; but the king*8 power is a substantive
one, always visible and active. By his offi-
cers, and in his name, every thing is trans-
acted that relates to the peace of the realm
and the protection of the subject. The sub-
ject /Ms this, arid acknowledges with thank-
fulness a superintending sovereignty, which
alone is congenial with the sentiments and
temper of Englishmen. In fine, the govern^^
ment of England is a foonarchy ;" a limited
monarchy unquestionably it is, and whether
those constitutionhl limitations upon the king^s
prerogative, which arc fixed by the law, and
which give it its known and notorious bounds
(«ad which limitationft form the hberty of the
subject), are sufficiently iilusi rated and stated
in this book, it is for you to judge presently ;
" the monarch is the antient stock from which
have sprung those goodly branches of the le-
gislature, the Lords and Commons, that at
the same titne gtveotnament to the tree, and
afford shelter to those wbo seek protection
tmder it."

Now, gentlemen, I beg ^rour attention te
the next passage ; end then it is for vou tode-
terroine which of us calls in the aid of criti-
cism, in order to give the true sen>e of this
passage. ** But these are still only brsnches^
and derive their origin and their aatrlment
from their conamon parent; they may bt
lopped ofT,-^" What is the meaning of
lopping off a branch from a tree } Should I
be thought to state myself uncandidly, if I
were to say now, that the parliament of yes*
terday— being, as I undeifeUiid) dissolved to^
day — should I speak according to the Idn*-
guage of the law and constitution of Great
Britain, or should I not at least speak With
a degree of hazard tlatt ought to make me
subject to an inqnti^ before a jury, if I were
now to say. The king of O^eat Brituo is 4
tree, there were got^y brscptf^s vesteiday
that gave ornament to him, and shelter to
those wbo sought proteetion under him.; but
the Lonis and Commons are lopped off? —
" and the tree is a tree still ; shorn indeed of
its h^n^urs, but not, likejiwtn, cast into the
fire.*' What is the fneming of «< cast into tb«
§atV* Is4t, or not, destruction ?

My fcteibd says, speaking again nfetApbo^
rically, that there may be new brattcbes
springing out of this tree; look at \M ttMt
pessage, and see if that cUn be the me^nittg

589]

on ihi English Constitution*

A. D. 1796-

[590

of it : <' Th« kiaDy goY^rnmeBt may go on,^
— how i« it to go 00 ? — *^* iaall its functioQs*'>
— tb« functions before meotioned of making
^d executing Uws; but, if you please so to
t3.ke it, put out making of \AVis ; theexeruUng
the U.WS is one of ^ all the functions" of tlte
king, and is 9, function to be carried on, sub*
ject, as I before stated, to revision by parlia-
ment, and those who advise the king are re-
sponsible, and. so on ; — but how ? — with new
branchp^io the room of those which have
been lopped oSy and cast into the fire ? No ;
wilboHt any branches — ''without Lords or
Commons ; it has heretofore done so for years
together, and in our times it does so during
every recess of parliament;*' — I want to know
then, gentlemen, whether this assertion does
not amount to this, that if the kin^ did not
vwxi the advice of the two Houses m his exe-
cutive government, or if he did not want their
coDSfeBt to make new laws, he could go on
executing the old laws without them :— If that
be the true meaning of this passage, I am
Dersiiaded I need take no nuns with you to
prove that thia is an illegal, publication—'' it
nas heretofore done so for years together^and
in 9ur times it does so during every recess of
parliament ; but without the King his parlia-
ment is no more. The king, therefore, alone
it is who necessarily subsisASy without change
or diminution; and firom Ami alone we un-
ce^ingly derive the protection of law and go-
Teroment."

Gentlemen, when I am stating whether a
proposition be true or not, I am not at all de-
ciding upon the question whether the charac-
ter obaried in this infonnation belongs to i^;
1)ut we 3q not derive the protection of law
and government from the king aloa^. At
this moment we have no Lords and Commons
oUled togejlber, undoubtedly, by the king's
writ; but the proteetion wnich mj^ fellow-
subjects and! derive from the king is this ; —
We derive that protection from him which is
aioJEded US by a British king boitnd^ according
t^ the omsiiMiom, to conacne together a Br^
tish parliament ; and every power of the exe>
cuilive government must, in the interim, be
exerosedf regard bciog had ta the circum-
stance that that pavliaaient must come toge-
tbe^ — ^tbat he is bound to bring them toge-
ther for the pbrposea staled in the Bill of
OtghtSyfor the redresB of grievances, for the
a«Qending, strengthening, and revising the
laws, and (among other purposes) for the pur-
pose of considering what has been the con-
duct of those who nave been called upon con-
stitutional^ to. advise him in the interim.

A|y friend has very powerfiilly addressed
you upon the passage which follows; — ** Such
sure the p];inciples and constitution of the Eng-
lish government delivered down to us from
our ancestors ; such they can be demonstrated
to be^ from the incontestible evidence of his-
tory and records ; and such it is wished they
should continue by nine^tenthsof the nation.''
Af y friend says^can you beheve that this gen-

tleman was so much a fool or a madmaaaa to.
stale to this country that the king was to carry
on the purposes of legislatba without hia
parliament ? I know not what other answer
to give to that than this; I say that he baa
been accused in consequence of its having
been thought by many wise and good men
that this was the meaning of the passage. It
is j/<wr duly to decide between him and the
acrusatioo, and to make deliverance: but
when you are asked what he meant^ the best
way for you to solve that question, I
humbly apprehend, is to look at what he baa
said. 11 what he has said baa had the true
ioierpretation put upon it by this information,
I apprehend Uien it is your duty to the coun-
try to say he is guilty ; if your consciences are
not satisfied that this in&rmation has given
the true construction to the passages which
you have so repeatedly hearo, it is not the-
character of British justice — ^it is not the way
of vindicating the privilegesof tlie Britislj par*
liament to auc for a conviction where it is not
due to British justke. With you this matter
rests, and I am sure you wilt conscientiously
discharge your duty.

Summing up.

Lord Kenyan. — Gentlemen of the Jury.
This case bavins been so amply discussed on
the one side and on the otheri very little re-
mains for me to do. Early in the cause, the
case was delivered from all necessity of proof;
l)ecausc the first step taken after the attorney
general had opened, for 'the crown, was, that
the counsel lor the defendant admitted the
publication by Mr. Reeves. The witnesses
afterwards called respecting that &ct> appear
to me to have been rather unnecessarily calt«
ed: however, you have lieard their evidence.

To a superficial observer, the contest of Ihia
day, perhaps may anpear very unequal. The
prosecution is stated to have commenced in
consequence of an address from the House of
Commons to tl)e kin^, to direct hia attorney-
general to institute this prosecution against a
private individual. That isa very beautiful
feature uf the constitution of this oountiy
which is exiubited at this momeot in yoqr
presence, and in the part whush you are to
sustun in this cause. A prosecution coming
with such high authority, in ftictioua times,
and in bad sovernments, might overwhelm an
individual ; out the constitution of this coun-
try has interposed a Jury between what other-
wise might perhapa be the of^psessor and the
oppreM^ : the case is sent for vou (taken out
of the same rank and order oC men with the
person who is accused) to decide upon his guik
or innocence ; bringing with yei> all that can-
dour and all those favourable improssions and
leanings to the side of mercy, which are al-
ways adopted in the administration of the
criminal justice of this country.

It became Mr. Attorney General in his out-
l^set to do that which he did most learnedly
and most eloqul|ntly;— to display to you the

501] 36 GEORGE IIL Trial ^ John Reeves, Esq. far a Libel f59f

sist a prosecution so carried on ; he was noC
borne down by the weight of the prosecutors;
the jury found that the cause came to them
without any impression whatever ; they judged
of the case not because the House of Com-
mons had judged of it, adopting their ideas
that the pamphlet was a libel and punishable ;
but they assumed to themselves the right to
judge of it by themselves ; they asserted that
right finally, and in that case certainly they
declared the narty whom the House of Com-
mons accusea to be Not Guilty.

Upon the trial of that cause, it was slated
to them most ably and must eloquently, thai
in proceeding to form their opinion upou it,
they were not to select out a single expression
unexplained by the contextand unaccompanied
by the whole of the book, and for that reason
to impute guilt to the party accused. They
Were advised (as I shall presently advise you)
to take the book along with them, to consi-
der the whole fairly, candidly, and impartially;
and from a due consideration of the whole to
extract what their judgment ought to be upon
the passage to which delinquency was im-
putea.

Gentlemen, you are here to find the de-
fendant guilty, or to absolve him, having re-
spect to the particular passage that is taken
out of the pamphlet. If guut is not annexed
to that particular passage, the party goes ab-
solved. But, gentlemen, although you are
only to extract your opinion of guill or inno»
cence from that passsige, yet vou may (and
ought perhaps to) go into the book at large,
in order —not from other parts to say whether
he is guilty or not, but from other parts to
give its extent, its qualification, or restricted
sense if you please, to the passage which im-
putes guilt to him.

Gentlemen, with these observations I shall
beg leave to state to you what it is which Mr.
attorney-general very candidly states to you
you must be convinced of in order to find the
defendant guilty — the quo animo with which
this publication was made by the party. The
quo animo which the prosecution imputes to
him is this; — that he, oy this publication ir»-
tended to raise and excite Jealousies and di-
visions among the liege subjects of our lord
the king, and to alienate their affections from
the government by King, Lords,and Commons,
now duly and happily established by law in
this country, ana to destroy and subvert the
true principles of the free constitution of the
government of the realm. It is laid afler-
wards with some variations in three, other
counts of the infonnation. Th^ main parts
of this charge are ; that this was intended to
impress upon the public that the regal power
and government of this realm migh^ consist-
ently with the freedom of this realm as. by
law declared and established, be carried on in
all its functions by the king of this realm, aU
though the two Houses of Parliament sbouM
be suppressed and abolished. Thai is the
quo animo which is imputed to tbia person.;

nature of the British constitution. He went
10 the most authentic sources to extract his
information, and he did it in a manner that
did him great honour. But at the time when
he did it, I verily believe, he thought that he
was not imparting much information to any
of those to whom his speech was addressed.
Sufficient knowledge of the constitution is a
degree of knowledge which we all of us have
in our several stations— at least every body
who has had a liberal education ; it is a know-
ledge that we have all of us probably about us;
-*-we all know that the legislature of this
country consists in the King, the Lords, and
the Commons, — that the executive power
rests with the king alone, liable to be super-
intended, and to be corrected too by the two
Houses of Parliament —not to be corrected in
the king's person, because that by the consti-
tution is inviolable, — ^ the king can do no
wrong'*— but to be corrected in those minis-
ters through whose agency active government -
is carried on; if they misconduct them-
selves (and there must be a responsible per-
son in every part of the government of this
country), they are amenable to parliament,
and liable to be punished b^ parliament, if
they transgress the bounds of their duty.

Gentlemen, the power of free discussion is
certainly the right of all the subjects of the
country. We owe more to it than to almost
any other right which the citizens of this
country have exerted; — I believe it is not
laying m too much claim on the behalf of free
and temperate discussion to say{ that we owe
to it the Reformation, and that we owed to it
afterwards the Revolution. The discussion
which was made by Luther, Melancthon, and
the other persons who preceded the Reforma-
tion, opened the^ejres of the public; and they
fot rid of the delusions which had been spread
y the pope of Rome, and emancipated man-
kind from the spiritual tyranny they were un-
der, and brought about the estabhshment of
that religion which we now enjoy in this
country.

It had the same good effects upon the Re-
volution ; if tl.ere are, now and then, little ex-
crescences, or some little film upon the eye, it
is better to endeavour to wipe them off ten-
derly and carefull? than to extiujguish them
violentlv. Therefore, in discussions of this
kind, although licentiousness ought beyond
all controversy to be restrained, fair discussion
ought not to be too hardly pressed upon.

It has been properly stated by the attorney-
general, and it, was stated upon a former oc-
casion, when a prosecution of this very sort

came on ; for this is not the first prose^-

cution that I have tried, since I have had the
honour of sitting under the authority in which
I sit here, instituted by the House of Com-
mons add carried on by the attorney-general.
— In the case of the King v. Stockflale* it was
so instituted ; he came, an individual to re-

• See it, anl^. Vol. 82,ip. 23> .

S0S7

on ihi Sng^h CamiiMion*

A, D. 179&

CSM

juid when jou proceed to diKuss and to de-
cide upon ihis pomk, you are to find whether
your consciences are satisfied, that these were
the motives which influenced him in the pub-
lication. I think that is the way in which
|he attorney-general, in his opening, stated
the nature of the charge.

Now the passage which has been selected
in order to prove this I will once more repeat
to you. Whether it is new to you I do not
know ; but it is new to me, for I never read
one single, line of the pamphlet, nor ever
Keard one line of it read till I heard it read
here ; I confess it has been in my power to
have read it, but I thought it mv duty to ab-
stain from it, and that i shoidd come better
prepared to hear this cause (I have little to do
in the decision), if I came with my mind to-
tally a blank upon the occasion.
. The passage which has been stated to you
appcvs somehow to be rather a mutilated
passage,* for it begins with words of reference.
\* Witn the exception, therefore, of the advice
aod consent of the two Houses of Parliament,
and the interposition of juries: the govem-
ijaent, and the administration of it in all its
parts, maf be said to rest wholly and solely
on the king, and those appointed by him.
Those two ^yuncts of parliament trnd Juries
are subsidiary and occasional ; but the King's
power is a substantive one, always visible and
active. B^ his officers, and in his name,
^ery thing is transacted that relates to the
peace of the realm and the protection of the
aubject. The subject feels this, and acknow-
ledges with thankfulness a superintending
sovereignty, which alone is coiigenial with
the sentiments and temper of Englishmen.
in fine, the government of England is a mo-
narchy ; the monarch is the ancient stock
from which have sprung those goodly branches
of the legislature, the Lords and Commons,
that at the same time give ornament to the tree,
»nd afford shelter to those who seek protection
pnder.it. But these are still only branches, and
derive their origin and their nutriment from
their common parent ; tney may be looped off
snd the tree is a tree stilfj shorn indeed of
its honours, but not, like them^ cast^ into the
$re. The kingly ^vemment may go on, in
all its functions, without Lords or Commons :
It has heretofore done so for years together,
fod in our times it does so durins every re-
cess of parliament; but without tne king Ais
parliament is no more. The king, therefore,
alpne it is who necessarily subsists, without
change pr diminution ; and from him alone we
tinceasingly derive the protection of law and
government." That is the passage which b
proved : Whether it was published with the
Hiptive or not is the question of the present
iniovte for you to deade.
^'.X ^y^ ^0^ f^ ^roukh the whole of thia
Sampniet so as to have /iqou^bt my mind to
sd^^^^oa upon thQ pointy it is nQt.to be my
^Isibahut ypurs. If { wisra bound t? decide
iti if the verdict wero to be my verdict, and

VOL, XXVI.

not yours, I certainly should retire ; I should
take the charge with me, I should examine
the charge ; I should take the pamphlet,
with me, I should examine the pamphlet;
and I should see, with every fair leanmg to
the side of lenity and compassion, whether I
thought the party was guilty or not. I say,
with|everyyair leaning, but still not with that
leaning which is to do away the effect of tha
criminal law of the countrv; for it is as essen-
tial to the well being of the country that the
criminal law shoulcTbe put in force, as that
the civil law should be nut in force. To be
sure, we are always told that tliat is to be
done in mercy, and the king by his corona-
tion oath is to administer, in criminal mat-
ters, justice in merc^; but still it is not to be
that blind mercy which obliterates the offence,
if the offence is proved. It is with you, gen-
tlemen, to decide; and I leave it in your
hands.

The Jury retired to consider of their vef«
diet, and remained out of court upwards
of an hour; when they returned into
court, the foreman said :

^ My Lord, the Jury are . of opinion,
that the pamphlet which has been proved
to have been written by John Reeves
esq. is a very improper publication;^

* This censure upon the pamphlet is re-
ported to have been occasionea by one of the
Jury, who refused to join in the verdict of ac-,
quittal, unless his brethren would express
publiclv to the Court a disapprobation of tho
pamphlet: the eleven acquiesced, and the ver«
diet was framed accordingly.

The circumstance of this hostile person be*-
ing lefl on the Jury is thus noticed by ** The
Se](aj^enarian,'' in the character of Mr. Reeves,
vol. 11. ch. 83 ;— " The result was, however,
finally to his honoin*, and he was acquitted of
the enormous offences, with which he had
been charged.

*^ One incident occurred on the bccasion of
this memorable trial, which is related in .our
notes, and whichj if the subject of this article
should survive to peruse these recollections,
he will probably not forget.

^ Our Sexagenarian called upon him one
morning, previous to his trial, when he had
before him a list of the persons who were sum-
moned on the jury. *He accordinj^ly asked
our friend, if he knew any thin^ of the pri*
vate characters, or political opinions of any
of these individuals. On es^amining *the.
names, the writer of these notes fixed on one,
to which, for reasons ha stated at length, he
recommended him to desire his counsel to
object.

<^ This, however, he either foreot, or was,
perhaps, too indifferent as to the event, or
did not think the causa of objection on the.
part of the Sexagenarian valid. The result
was^ that this person was allowed to sit oa
the jury; but it afterwardi appeared, that the v.

t Q

5951 S7 GEORGE Itl.

bul being of opinioni that his motites-

Trialf^Min BSnm

(lSW

were not such as laid in th« iafonuttXHif
find him N6t Guilty.''

<m\y obstacle to an hnmcdiate dismissal of

the charge, arose from the persevering and I whose prejudices he bad been tedf,

determined obstinacy ofthis individual, against I vainly forewarned."

620^ Trial of John Binns on an Indictment for Seditiont
Words ; tried at Warwick before the Honourable Sir
William Henry Ashhurst, Knight, one of the Juatieea
ef his . Majesty's Court of King^s-Bench, on Tuesday,
August 15th I 37 Georgs HI. a. d. 1797.

JVBT.

SpecialJuron,

George Heimnhiff, of Weddfngton. Fdrimtm.
William Hblbeacby of Famboroi^h.
Samuel Aylwortb, of Kenilworth.
Francis Edward Hoi voake, of Little Honiv
Blias Webb^ of Sherborne.
Charles Pahnery of Ladbrooke, esqn.

TalUmen,

Joseph Amoidr ot Duddestnn, gent.
Samuel Beamish, of Bulkington, farmer.
I'homas Chapman, of Wellesbourn Hastingj,

builder-
Thomas Geaiy, of Attleborough, yeoman.
Thomas Wrightson. of Wootton, yeoman,
James Hand, of AtUeborough, yeoman.

(kmntel for the Proseeittum.^'Tht hoB.
Spencer Perceval [afterwards First Lord of
the Treasury, and Chancellor of the Exche-
quer] ; Mr. Ck>ke, Mr. Balguy, Mr. Clarke.

Solicitori.'^MT. White^ Solicitor to the
Treasury. ; Mr. Spurrier, Birmingham.

Coufuel for the Defendant. -^^r. [after*
wards Sir Satanel] Romiiiy, Mr. Reader,
Mr. Fletcher.

iSS9^icWor«.— Messrs. Smart and Eosseau,
London.

Mr. Clarke opened the Indictment. It
follows.

InDIC9IEH7.

^"^^H The jurow ^ our lord the
f(^ v». 1 jjjjjg yp^jj ^j^g- ^^jj present

Ihat John. Binns late of Birmingham in the
eounty of Warwick labourer being a malicious
seditious and ill-disposed person and greatly
#teffected to our said lord the king and the

Enment and constitution of this realm as
w established on the eleventh day of
h in the thirty sixth year of the reign of
our said lord the now king at Birmingham
m the county of Wanrtck did wickedly uOt
kwAilly and seditiously speak -publish utwr
ioA dickvia to «ad in the preseae6 and heaii

ing of divers liese subjects of our sud lord the
king then and mere assembled of and con-
cerning our said lord the kinr and the so*
vemment and constitution of tnis realm asiyy
law established and of and concerning a re-
form in the Commons House of Parliament of
this realm and of and concerning universal
suffrage in the election of persons to serve m
the parliament of this kingdom and of andf
concerning annual parliaments and' tile means
ef obtaining the same and also of and con-
cerning the solders of our said lord the kins
the scandalous malicious and seditious woras
following (that is to say) his ma^ty (mean-
ing our said lord the king) and his ministers
are well convinced that that (meaning unU
versal suffrage m the election of persons tc»
serve in the parliament of this kin^om and
annual parliaments) is most conducive to tile
happiness of the people and have granted it
to Corsica though he (meaning our said lotd
the king) has withheld that right from his na-
tural subjects (meaning the people of this
realm) our object is to obtain it by every
peaceable meahs in our power for it would be
shocking to humanirjr to shed the blood of
our fellow creatures but if they (meaning hit
said majesty and hi« ministers) continue ob-
stinate and there should be a time when force
is necessary to be used I (meanmg himself
the said John Binns) hope that there is not •
citizen in the room rot would shed his last
drop of blood eith^ in the field or on the
scaffold You are not to tiiink much of your
own lives for you are engaged in the cause i^
posterity tiidueh the blood may flow firomtfacr
ajte down the block it will spnnkle the earth
and a tree will arise that will spread lie
branches to future generations If the sol-
diers (meaning the soldiers of our sai<l' lent
the king) are called upon to act against yott
like the national guards who were oilled upoti
to fire on the people in the outset oftherevo*
hition in France they (meaning thesoMieni
df our sakl lord th^ king) willnot^neto'diaw
tiie tri^er or puU) the bayonet akaiQit tHi
prcservet^ of t&eir fiisedbin aiid'tlieu^ Hbettjr
wHh intbottlo \tgiM add scii^ tiA tfie tMftW
ef Ibis ipilm t0<hli£«l iMiMmit tfW

am

JkrlMUbm Wai^.

a. S. 1997.

PHB

penMn^of Mr jmU'IoiiI the king tod of tli9#(»-
^eniiMDt and oonsiiUitiion of tols fralm as oy
Uw^^bKfbed in coatemptofour saidlora
the kiugaiid bis laws to the evil eiample of
all otfaersin the like caseoffending and against
the peace of our said lord the king his crown
and dignity And the jurors aforesaid upon
ibeir oaths Aforesaid do further present that
the said John Binns so being such person
as a&resaid afterwavds (to wit) on the said
Seventh day of March in the thirty-sixth
year of the rdgpi of our said laid the now king
^ Birminghaoi albiesaidin the countv of War-
wick albiesaid did xnalideua^ wickedly unlaw-
fiilkr and S(pditiaas^y speak publish utter and
declaie .toand in the presence and hearing of
4iveffs liqge sabjects <if our said locd the kins
<lf and coneesoing our said lord the kins and
the igo^mmiQit and constitution of this
aealm as by law eetabfished and of and con*
eenxioga ueform of the Commons House of
Parliament of this realm and of and concern*
uig univ^Eaal suffrage in the election of per-
sons to sewe in the parliament of this kmg-
4loni and annual parliaments other the acan-
4akmaiiialicious n)d seditious words follow-
ii|g (tbatis to say) his majesty (meaning our
emd loid thn king) and his ounistars are well
aonviBoed that that (meaning univeraal suf-
ftaae in the election -of personsAo senre in the
inAament of this kinggaiw and annual par-
iiamenla) is most conShiGive to the happiness
of the people and have panted it to Corsica
though be (mi»oing«ovyc said lord the kms)
has witbhetd that nght from his natural sub-
jects (ywwwwflgiAie people of tins realm) with
intent to in4lt luid stir up the people of this
teaha to haired and contempt of tne person
#f ourtsaidilQrd the king vA. of the govern-
ment and ossst&fenticii^n this realm as by law
astablished in contempt of our said lord the
Icing and his laws to tne evil example of all
Others in the like caie offending and against
the peace ofour said lord the king his crown
and dignity And the jurors aforesaid upon
their oaths albteaaid do further. present that
the aibiesaid John Binns so bang such per-
aoB as aforesaid afterwards (to wit) on the said
clflventh day of March in the thirty- sixth
year aforesaid at Bicmingham aforesaid in
the eoun^ of Warwick aforesaid did mali-
ciously wickedly unlawfully and seditiously
apeak publish utter and declare to and in the
{Hesence and heuing of divers Hege subjects
af ourwdiord the king of and concerning
our said lord the king and his ministers by
him inmuted and employed in theadminis*
tntioii of bis gavamment and of and concern*
iogA nefofmin thejmrfamcnt of this realm
a^ the means of obtaining the same the
acaadakwsoiaMdows and sedttious words fol-
loMQg^Aaifift toaay) our olyect is to obtain
al^ (meaning njefenn iortbe parliament of this
kingdom).^ every peaceable '.meaos in our
poner. lor it weald ibe flAMckiag to humanity
to j^ the Uoadof our fellow cceatures but
if tijqr (mpaainghieaaidituoeiler'sfliinialem)

oonlinuft obsttdate and4bere should <beatime
when force is necessary to be used I (meamng
himself the said John Binns) hope there ie
not a citizen in the room but would shed bia
last drop of blood either inthe field or on the
acafifold with intent to incite and stk up tha
people of this realm to hatred and coBtsmpt
of the person of our said lord the king and of
the government and oooatitutionof this realm
as by law established in contempt«of our said
lofid the king and his laws to the evil exam-
ple of all others in the like case oflfending
and against the ipeaceof our said lord the king
his crown and dignity And the jurofft aUsr^*
said upon their oath aforesaid do fisr ther pre*
sent that the aforesaid John Binns so beiw
such person as afoiesaid afterwards (to wiQ
on the saki eleventh day of March in the
thirty-'Siith year afomsaid at Birmingham
aforesaid in the county of Warwick aforesaiA
did maliciously wickedly uolawiully aadsedU
tiously publish utter and declare to ax^d in the
presence and V^ri«yg of divers liege siA^^cjcta
of our said lord the king of and concerning
the soldiers ofour said lord the king and hoar
such soldiers would act if force sbomd be used
to obtain a reform in the parliament of thie
kingdom other the scandalous malicious iuid
seditious words following (that is to say) if
the soldiers (meaning the soldiers ofour said
lord the king) wereialled upon to act against
you like the national guards who were called
upon to fire on the people in the outset of the
revolution in France they (meaning the said
soldiers) would not dare to draw tEe trigger
er push the bayonet against the preservers of
their freedom and their liberty wah intent to
incite and stir up the people of this realm to
hatred and contempt of the government and
constitution of this realm as by law established
in contempt ofour said lurd the king and hia
laws to the evil example of all others in the
like case offendins and against the peace of
our said lord the king lus croma anddigaitgr.
The Honourable Spfiacxa Pebceval.-*
May itplease your lordship ; Gentlemen of the
Jury ; In the opening of this case (of the me*
rits of winch, no doubt -can posMbly /emain ift
your minds, af\er bearing the evidence) I do
not think it necessary to trouble you with
many observations ; and indeed if it were not
the constant practice of the courts^ in cases of
this nature, I should not think it necessary
to trouble you at all : I shall, therefore, con-
tent myseU with briefly statins to you, the
words, which t will prove, by tne most undo*
niable evidence, to nave been spoken by the
defendant: leaving it to you, -^tlemen off
the jury, to eonsi^r and deteanme, whether
they oouid have been, uttered with any other
inlention, than thatmeotioaed in the indict-
laoat, and which constitutes the crime:
namely, with intent to incite and stir up the
people (his hearers) to hatred and contempt of
the person of our lord thekins, and of the go*
vemmcnt and constitution or this realoii as
l^Jaw

II

299J

97 GEORGE IH.

Drui ^John Sinns.

[600

Id the first place. I shall point out for your
observation, a few leading facts, proper to be
noticed, and whicbi it cannot be denied, are
of a very suspicious complexion.

It was on the 11th of March, 1796, that
Jtfr. Binns, being at Birmingham, assembled
a considerable number of persons at a public-
bouse, and haranjgued them, for a consioerable
tkne, on the subject of parliamentary reform ;
profesnng himself to be a member of the Lon-
don Corresponding Society, irom which he
bad letters of credit — witli which he corre-
sponded—by which he was delegated — ^to
which he held himself accountable for his
oonduct, and from whose instructions he was
not to swenre ; openly asserting that the ob-
jectof his misnoD was^ to eetablish or confirm
the establishment of a similar society, to
correspond with the societjrin London, and
to oo^pemte with that society^ for the pre-
tended purpose of reform.

These, gentlemen, are facts, which, it
must be owned, wear a most suspicious face.
But I proceed, eentlemen, to state to you
the precise words which I will prove him to
have spoken, on the testimony of witnesses
whose credit cannot be shaken.

The words I shall first notice, and which
are contained in the first count of the indict-
ment, are, *' That his majesty, and his mi-
nisters, were well convinced that annual par-
liaments and universal suffrase, were most
conducive to the happiness of the people, and
luid granted it to Corsica, though ne had re-
liiseaf it to his natural subjects.^

If, gentlemen, I shall prove these words, it
is impossible that you can for a moment ima-
gine them to have been spoken with any other
Tiew than to sow the seeds of disafiection,
and incite and stir up the peo|)le, as menlioned
in the indictment; and which mischievous
effect, they were veiy well cdculated to pro-
duce.

. But, gentlemen, he said farther (as I shall
also prove) '* that it was their object to obtain
it by every peaceable means in their power ;
for that it would be shocking to hnroanity to
shed the blood of our fellow creatures ; but
that if they (his majesty and bis ministers)
continue obstinate, and there should be a time
when force is necessary to be used, that he
(John Binns) hoped there was not a citizen
in the room but would shed his last drop of
blood, either in the field or on the scaffold.
You are not to think much of your own lives
(said he) for vou are engaged in the cause of
posterity; and though the blood may fiow
irom the axe down the block, it will sprinkle
the earth, and a tree will arise, that will
spread its branches to future generations."

These are the words, gentlemen, which I
take upon me to prove. In Uie first place,
gentlemen, he asserts, that his m^esty is
wdl convinced that annual parliaments and
universal sufirage, are most conducive to his
people's happiness; that his majesty well
knows what woaM make. his people n^py,

and yet withholds this happinen finom them ;
implving, that his majesty not only knows,
but has the power to make his people happy
if he would; for, says the defendant, he has
g^ranted these privileges to the people of Cor-
sica, thouj^h he withholds them from his na-
tural subjects; and thus charging his ma-
jesty with partiality towards his new subjects,
and with injustice and oppression to his na-
tural subjects, the people of this country.

You will, indeea, be told, by my learned
friend, that the defendant did not speak these
words of his majesty, but that he himself
(John Binns) was well convinced that annual
parliaments and untversal sufirage, were most
conducive to the happiness of the people ; so'
far, so well; but, gentlemen, I will prove,'
on the oaths of two credible vritnesses, that*
the words were spoken as laid in the Indicl-'
ment ; and if I prove this, it is impossible ta'
deduce any other inference from them, than
that stated in the indictment.

•Mr. Binns, after these eztnordinary words,
proceeds to say, ^ that their object waste oh-'
tain a parliamentary reform, by every peace-'
able means in their powe^ ;'' and you will be'
told by my leamea friend, that he recom->
mended no other than legal and peaceable
means. But, gentlemen, if this were the*
case, why talk of force f why talk Of a time
when force may be necessary to be used ? why
talk of a scaffold f of bk>od flowing from the
axe, and sprinkling the earth? why talk of
sacrificing our lives to posterity? are these/
gentlemen, espressions of peace P No ! the
natural, the obvious, the only meaning that
can lie put upon these words, is, that peace-
able means were indeed to be made use of, to
be tried : but if these foiled of their effect, then
force was to be applied, and men were ta
practise the monstrous doctrine of sacrificing
their lives in the cause of posterity; this,
gentlemen, is a folse philosopher. It would/
indeed, be shockine to humanity (said he)
to shed the blood of our fellow-creatures ; but
if they continue obstinate, and a time should
come when force is necessary to be used, you
are not to think much of your own lives, for
you are embarked in the cause of posterity;
and I hope there is not a citicen in the room;
but would shed his last drop of blood either
in the field or on the scafibld. •

Peaceable and legal means were to be first
tried; but iftheir demands were resisled; if
their wishes were not complied with ; then, it
was that every sinew was to be braced, and
they were not to mind shedding the blood of
their fellow-creatures^ or even to scruple sa*
crificing their own hves^ either on the 'scaf*
fold or lu the field.

Gentlemen, you will not, I am sure, sap»
pose that these are the sentiments of gemdiia -
patriotism, in which ws are called uponr 'ito '
sacrifice those- enjoyments and inteieslS'in*
which our nearest and dearest eonnerions-aie
embsrked with us, for the cbunerical hope of
improving thf sQUdttioo of poilflri^.

eon

fir SeXtwiii Wwrdi.

A. D. 1797.

[602

IpaMOiiygentleiiieii) tofhctfemtinlng words
in toe indictment; ^ If (sa^rs be) the soldiers
ate called upon to act against you, like the
National Guards, who were called upon to
£re on the people in the outset of the revolu-
tion in France, they would not dare to draw
the tiigger, or push the bayonet against the
preservers of their freedom and their libeity.*'

Is this, or is it not, gentlemen, a cross libel
on the soldiery of this country ? ana can you
believe that the man, who having boldly held
forth the doctrine of the necessity of force ;
thus iibellously insinuated, that all resistance
would be rendered nugatory, because the spirit
ofthe soldiery would not suffer them to act
against the people, struggling in the cause of
freedom; can you, I say, for a moment sup-
pose that this man spoke from honest and pa-
triotic motives^ or from any other than those
stated in the indictment f

On this occasion, it will be impossible for
my learned friend to allege the usual pallia-
tions of seditious speeches, namely, that they
were uttered in the warmth of passion, in the
leal of argument, or in consequence of provo-
cation. They were the cool, deliberate, and
iin|>rovoked words of a roan, who had received
no injury, and to whom no crime was im-
puticd^ deliberately standing up, in a public
manner, and proceeding without hindrance or
molestation.

This customary plea, therefore, in pallia-
tions of inflammatory expressions, gentlemen,
cannot apply in the present case.

Gentlemen, I would not, in the smallest
desree, exert an undue influence over your
judgment: if, after heating the evidence
which I shall adduce, and under all the cir-
cumstances ofthe case, you can believe that
the defendant had no other iniention than to
enlighten the minds ofthe people, andjnstruct
them in the nature of their just and legal
rights ; if you can believe, generally speakine,
tmt his Views were upright, whatever might
be the doctrines he propagated (for, it is not
the nature of the doctnne that you have to
consider, as my lord will tell you) not whether
a reform in parliament be necessary or de-
sirable or not; this is not the question you
are to determine ; but whether he be guilty of
the seditious intentions stated in the indictr
ment.

If you are of opinion that his intentions were
honest and patriotic, make him, by all means,
every allowance for inadvertency of expres-
sion ; nay, fling into the scale a few, excuse
faim if you can, and however mistaken he
may be in his opinions, acquit him; for it
would be wrong to affix that as a crime, which
would be only an error in judgment. But if, on
the contrary, yeupare of opinion, that instead
of these honest and laudable intentions, he
aim#d onl;^ to inflame the minds of the people.
Mid to excite them to acts of outrage, mmI to
hatred and contempt of bis majeity's person
and government, and of our happy constitu-
ltoO| ynu aniiot honestly diickai^ your duty

to God and your country, olberwisa than by a
firm verdict of conviction*

Gentlemen, I shall not trouble you with'
any more observations at present, but shall
proceed to call the evidence.

EviDcvcE roa the PHosEcvrtoy.

Jouph Mason Guest sworn. — Examined by

Mr. Coke.

You live at Birmingham ?— I do.

Were you at Birmingham on the 11th
of March, 1796 ?— I was.

Do you recollect going that evenine to the
Swan public house m Swallaw-street r— Per*
fectly well.

At what hour ?-^Soon afler eight.

Did you find any body there whom yois
knew?— Yes.

Name them.—I saw Mr. Benjamin Sutton,
Mr. William Carver, and Mr. Richard Un-
derbill.

When you came there what did yon do ?-«
I inquired of the landlady if Mr. Jones was
to lecture there P she replied. No ; bat that--^

[Here the witness was interrupted by defeuc
dant's counsel, and desired to relate nothing
but what was said by or in hearing ' of the
defendant.}

Whom else did you find there? — ^I found
Mr. Binns, and a large party.

What do you mean by a large party P-^
About fifty or sixty persons.

What was Mr. Binns doine?'He was
speaking ; said he was delegated by the Lou*
don Corresponding Society; that delegpttes
had been sent to Portsmouth, and various
other parts of the kingdom ; I understood
him that he had lately been at Portsmouth-
he read some resolutions of the Portsmouth
Corresponding Society.

What did he do afUrwards? — ^He read a
list of rules laid down for his instruction by
the Lpndon Corresponding Society.

Did he read those rules from a printed or
a written paper f^I cannot say.

How did be proceed afterwards ?-*He said
he was not to sweiVe from his instructions;
complamed ofthe unequal representation of
the people : said that Scotland sent 45 mem-
bers to parliament, Cornwall as many ; that
the Cornish people luul obtained those privi-
leges by the spirit of resistance which they
liad formerly shown to their oppressors.

What farther did he say? — He recom*
mended tmiversal suffn^e and annual parlia-
ments; said that his nuyesty was aware that
such were most conducive to the happiness of
his subjects, as he had granted it to Cotsica,
though he withheld those rights from bis na-
tural subjects.

Before you prooeed, tell us whether be
named his (miyesty uone, or whether he
added the name of any other person ?— I can*
not be certain.

Whit mofi did he say?»Ht begged \mf%

MBE} 8? GBOfiGjB IIL

l» qvoSe imd olitBD TlioinM Mme and Midi*
<* suppose a roaoi ponmisuig acertun pro-
party, ahatdd be eoUUeil to a vote, and that
property consisted of a mule; if the mule die»
the man loses his vote: so that the mule has
the vote, and not the man :" by the same
rule, a man possessing a house which eatitled
him to a vote, if he was deprived of the
housei he' lost Iris vote ; therefore the man
had not the vote, but the bricks and mortar
— ^he saidy tiiatwhen Jffr. Pkt had heen ap-
plied ta, on the suljoet of parliamentary re-
form, in time of war, he eaid the time was im-*
pmper; when the same application was made
inioneof peace, he also said the time was im-

f roper ; Mr. Binns observed, that when Mr.
itt was JB place, Abe time«as impioper;
aivMienoutof place tbetime was pn^er ; he
recommended them to use all the pei^cable
muBM in iiieir potsrer to obtain their ends,
ibr tiMt it waa shocking to humanitv to
think of shedding the bl^d of their fellow-
cnatUMS.

Did he saarivhat their ends were P~-Uni^
wtnd siiftage, and annual parliament.

I wish you would speak in the first person;
not the«nect, hot the very words— say I—- so
and so.

[The witness, notwithstanding this intimation
being twice given,^continuS to speak in the
tbhrdpersonTj

Bui aft the jame time to be firm and deter-
mined—if their oppoMsta continued eibati-

TrudffJahtt Binm

[6U*^

Vf^mml Tafce the pkn I have chalked

[A conversation ensued between Mr. Ao-
miUy and the examining counsel on the im-
propriety of ^tting words into the wit-
nesses moqth— after some time the witness
}vraa suffisred to proceed.]

If Ibeir mwnenta 0Q«liaBed.iib«tiBata, and
theie shouM -be A lime rwihes it may be loeoai-
«ai3rlPtiBefbroe,halhoped no oiliEeniothe
room would hesitsite to shed the laatdrap wi
Ida blood, either inithe field «r im ihe actfbld
— ffae said theJivea of individuals weoeof littfe
imoiiient, wbeneofga^adin ^the canse of noa-
4enlgr^-«ad that bad our aaoeeto» been fear-
Atl'of laying down their lives fcribe pttfattc
■goo^,^MabaMhi,nothave emoyedsnao^ of Abe
fmrikgeawfaichweidoatttusday. Tbovgh
the hmd might .follow the «ae, and atnam
4own the block, it wouklsprsikle the earth.
^aA a Ine waukl asise adioae faraaafaea wmU
cslead to futum gsiiaraakttis.r^4fe spaiwof
aha aoktien, and aaid. Abaft Ibaugh Abey 'VPere
«h«t up in banaoks^ and dapnvad of tl^
aaeana of aonaenittg with iheir faUoir oiti-
aenS| they were alive to the sane fanliatn
<thaft whMher a jaan wane a ihrowa oeat, a
MaekoBCy^ora lad oae, las ibiliM viam the
4aBie— andif 1iheQF4aaeaaaQg ihaioMiers) wens
called upon to fire on tbe people, lika the aol-
Mlhrt Ihyl wfciiiiiMdipal ta iaa aaan Ae peo-

plo in the «asel >of fthe french revdhitioife
tbsgr would not dace to diaw the 4ngger,or
push the bayoaat agaioU the preservaca «f
their freedom and their liberty.

What else did he say ?— He complained of
the introduction of foreign troops into the
kingdom : but I do not recollect much what
he said concerning them.

Did he call the French soldiers by any
particular name.?— I do net recollect.

Where did you go to when yeu left the
Swan ?— To the Bell, in Suffolkpelreet, to find
Mr. Jones.

(Here the witness was again deaifad to rdlata
nothmg but what passed in psesence of tba
defendant]

Jatcph Mastm Cued cross-ezapiined by Mr.

Samilfy. ,

What is your profeauon?— 'lamathiead^
maker.

Are vou a person who are much in tha
habit of reading?— I do caad, but not much.

Have you «var 'been in the habit of at-
tending public meetingaof anjT kind ?— >No.

Have you been in the babitof exercising
your memoiy miieh?-— I have a pielty good
memoiy.

Haw many tianfts did you peruse this
speech 4>efbre you .got it hy heart?— I have
never learnt it by heart, I speak from reool-
laeiioa.

Did you take ai^ notes?— Yes. *

How long waa lit after the meeting when
you made your notas?— Aboat three or four
days, aa soon as I luiad my attendance
woidd be necessary.

You saor it was about three or kut days;
do you mean to speak .withaocuraqr? — ^Yes;
it was about three days. I waa sent fka on
SaMaday ; J think the meeting waaop Friday.
I saw Mc Uiok^ when he came and dispersed
the meeting where Mr. Jones was. Mr.
Hioks called oa a»e an the moroiog of the
aath, abe very neat day, and I want on tha
same moiBing to ^e public oftce.

What did you do at the nublic office?—
Mr. Hioka jdMiaed I woukl vekta what I had
aeanl.

Waa it takea down?— Yes; it waa takaa
jdown in the forenoon, befoie dinner.

Why did you make notes ?— I thought it

neeessaUr*
Have youftheflDtea about yaul—^o; they

aie atiiome in my deak.
Wiere yeu at 'the last assises.?— I waa.
Did yeu bring tticae notes with y4>u thea?

Pmy tell aie, why you did aotbiifl^ them/
— I did not think moj would be nectaaaiy.

What was your object in taking aetaal —
To lafiieah my memory.

Then yea Ma aosr apeakiogiiam Abe aotea
you made, aad aiot from ncaUselioa ?— 4
apeak from both. ^ .

How many Aiaias 4i4 .you aver laad yaur
netoi h ■ iftift wirii iiiiwi! Aronlaal atwiiti

eOB] Jht SeiUita Wmdk.

Dd jmnen tin GourMhaald Mimlkiiir
the speech was delivered Id the ezict onler

jDuh8virghraiit?^N«r0iietly intfaenne

order.

Did the parts immedkldky^ ibUow each
other ?— No.

Was meDtion made of the block balbro
the soldicra ?~No : I think ir wu after.

Were there any other parts of the speech
ddivend in a difierent onlev fiom what yon
have givcii?-<-There probably nwht

Waatfae begiuuDg the sanies— I think ic

But you have already told us the end
notP — ^I think he concluded with the blood
aprlakiuig the earth.

What proportion of his whole speech have
yiMi given us ?— I cmmot tall.

Do you think it is half?— It b hnpossibis
tony.

Do yon auppoae it to be om-fburthf—
Beall^ X cannot ny.

I think I need not ask yau whether you
are friendly or hostile to the doetilnes wbieh
you heard ?— Very hostile.

I take it for grantedi if, in the coumof
Mr. Bisna^ speeeh, he had said any thing
more improper than you have stated^ it must
have maae vvery strong ieapceauoD oo you?
—It certainly, would.

Yob have leM ua of some tesohrtiom of
the London Corresponding Society^were tlMry
fe■d^— >Thcy www.

Did you not ny there were resolutions of
the Portsmouth Society f—Tesw

Were there also md rssoluttone of the
liondon Corresponding Sliciety^— No; they
were rules or instruotions.

How many persons do you think were pie*
sent at the meieting f— Mors than siity .

Was it a large roomf*-It was not very
lam-
Have you been in tlie room since?— No.
. Have you ever heard of the room having
been measured, to try if it wouki hold fifty
peiwnsP- "No,

Are you not a member of the Buck's
lodge?— I' am.

Pray did you ever there dedave that yoti
dkl'Oot make minutes dll ewht or mne days
after your deposition?—! oo not lecolmf
that' I overdid.

Who were present at the meeting that
ym kaow?--There was a Mr. Diaon, of
Dij^.

* Who dseP-^The- Vm ceflBtabtes^ Mr.
Tay k>r and Mk Atkhn acid Mr. Weeld»idge,
keaper of the prison.

Were they before Uie nngistrals»?-^Ye^

■UOV wVrVe

Was their emmhiaieB taken d<mtol^r do
BOtknow; '

Do you remember Mr. Atkin» aSftMng
ysiiriBichofy when yen #el« j^H^g^ yott de-
position N-^Noi I do not
' YiNv Wire tetbiis> tin gMMftay'^fedotse.
Pray was Mr. Atkins exaArillMNM* 4^ t^
know; I was examined separately.

^ Bh £797.

Dd Ml yaai kiwi^ thM he wis
very businen the last
waahere, but I do not km

[606

tii^

know ho'

vdiakwasrhia

In the oouiee of tins, long speech whiefa you
have told us, did Mr. Binnareooannendpeaoa"
able conduct?— Yes*

Once only, or more f— Only onee.

Do you recollect any thmg moref-^Bw
said something aboat the Londoo Corrsfl-
ponding Society establbhing a pamphlet^ or
magasine, to make their pro^odmgs aa pdMlo
aa possible.

What moreP— -He said it was not his wish
ta oyertnni the oenstitttticaiy but' to eon*

How did this businen end?->-Whe» Mr.
Biaaa had done speakings the nneChig
broke up.'

Did everybody |oaway peaceably?— There
was a song in praise of atian Bnkhsi^ soul
trial by jury.

Was there no^sturbanoe of aay kmd?--
No t all was quiat.

I do not mean at the conclushm onl^
ttutat iny other tiitae ?— I nw nodistorbance,

Hate you, as nearly aa possible^ staled tho
eaaot wmds ?— I have.

Jmeph JIfdMa Guai ro-ciamined by Mr.

Coifce.

You mad6 your noln on th^ Monday Ibl*
lawtnc tho meetmg ?— Yes.

And were emmmed on the Saturday f^I
was.

You sawtiR two coastaibles atti^meet-
ng?— Yes.

Did they Slav the whole time N— No; I.saw
them go in and out.

At tne eondusioa of the meeting was SBO«
ther appointed ?^Yes»

Benjanun Sutton^ swom.*-£iamuiad fay Mr.

Balgiof.

Do you lemettiber beineatthe Swftn puMie
house« on the 11th of March^ lt90f-— Pen^
ioetivwdl.

What time dkl you gof ^r-Betwixtthe boors
of seven and eight.

Did yen go idone, or in company?-^!
west with Mr; Oues^ Mh Carver, and HkSr.
UMerMlL

Has any thttig happened tt> Mt. Chrvet
ttfioe?— He Iia9 been very tcffweil.

DM veu see Mh Bkms N^H^cttne hi mne
litM aAer^ard*;

Was he in a room inf tittt bouseft^HI^
was; m ootti|Nia]r'with cither ^nions:

Who were thmeirther' persons ?^I cannot
SAV; thegr were sitthig' roond ttao or ttiiee
tables.

How nMuQrhi numb«tt-i-I'caiDnot judge of
tiieir number^ many ctfueffa afterwiudik.

Do you ftmooihet'Mf. Bihrar be^^^umig'ta
discourse?— Yes. .

Iiti#- tfttoby wttt Vbttte itr tbt roontf^—l
tsfiUMtlML

BOT]

S7 GEORGE lU.

Trial qfJokm BimU

[808

How many do vou think attht fewest?—
More than sixty I am convinced*

Tell us, as nearly as you can, what he said f
— «Ue said he was delegated by the London
Corresponding Society, to form societies in
the country to correspond with that in Lon-
don ; the mode of correspondence be should
point out to a committee; that letters had
oeen often intercepted and opened, which pre-
venled a close co-operation, and frequent in-
tercourse between the country societies, and
that in London; that the sodet^r had fur-
nished him with a set of instructions, from
which he was in no wise to depart ; for if he
were, the society would not oe accountable
for his conduct; that as men differ respecting
the forms of government, their object was
to be obtained by every peaceable and legal
means—-

What object?— Universal sufirageand an-
nual parliaments.

I am desired to ask you, whether you are
speaking from what he said, or fiom his in-
structions?— ^It was in consequence of his in*
alructions.

Proceed. — ^He said that his miyesty and
his ministers were aware tliat it was not in-
consistent with the happiness of his people,
as he had granted it to Corsica, though he
had refused it to his natural subjects.

Mr. Justice AshkurH, — What do you un-
derstand was not inconsistent with the hap-
piness of his people f — ^Annual parliaments^
and universal suffrage, my lord.

Mr. Justice Ashhunt, — Proceed.

Wiinat."'ln the course of his speech, he
inveighed against the introduction, of foreign
troops, it having been the custom of men,
who were about to undermine the constitution
to do it by means of mercenaries. Foreigners
could not be supposed to have the same in-
terest in the welfare of a country, as a native ;
and whether a man wore a red coat or a black
one, he still had, among the people, his
dearest connexions. Upon this principle it
was, that the soldiers of France refused to
pusn the bayonet or draw the trigger, asainst
the people. On this account he reprobated
the conduct of burying soldiers in barracks ;
he read from some pamphlet, which he said
no one had dared to contradict, that a ttuuo-
rity of the House of Commons was nominally
leturned by about 5,000 persons ; but actually
by a much less number, I think he said about
150; said that Cornwall returned as many
members as Scotland, a privilege which they
obtained by the spirit of^ resistance they had
shown to their invaders. Charters, he said,
were oppressive, inasmuch as they deprived
one set of people of their rights to give them
to another.

Did he say any thing of the means by
which a change was to be brought about ?-^
I understood It was to.be brought about by
peaceable means.

^ Did he sayt^v thing about posterity?—
He said it was a duty we owed to posterity ;

but I cannot charge mj misnory with parti-
culars.

Did you not say he s|x>ke of the soldiers of
France ? — I understood it of them.

Did he distinguish them by any particular
name } — ^I think he called them the National
Guards.

National euards do you say ?— Yes.

What did he say about the soldiery of this
country? — That they would not push the
bayonet or draw the trigger against the peo-
ple ; but I am not certain of these points.

Did he say any thing about barracks I — I
think he did.

Benjamin Sutton cross-examined by Mr.

Reader.

Of what trade are you, Mr. Sutton?— A
button-maker.

Did not you say that Mr. Carver and Mr.
Underbill accompanied you to the meeting ?
— ^Yes.

Did you say that Mr. Carver had been veipr
unwell?— Yes; he has been derangedinh&
mind.

What u become of Mr. UnderhiU?— He
is now at Birmingham; I saw him a few
days ago.

Have you been in the habit of attending
public speakers much?— rNever, except a de-
bating society there was some time ago at
Birmingham.

Do you exercise your memocy much?—
Not much.

Do you go to church ? — Sometimes.

Do you recollect as much of any discourse
you have ever heard at church, as you do of
this speech of Mr. Binns's ?— I cannot say
I do.

Did you and the last witness stand toge-
ther ?— I think we did.

What you heard it is most likely he heard
also P— Yes.

And what he heard you must have heard
also?— Certainly..

Pray what sice was the room?— It was a
small room.

A small room, do you say ?-«-It was not a

venr lai]ge one.

'as it large enough to contun fifty per •
8ons?-<-Yes.

Would it contain sixty persons?— Yes, or
more.

Pray how n)any would it contain, you say
it was a small room ?'-I cannot say exw:tly«

Were the company sitting or standing?—.
When we went they were standing.

Did the majority sit orstend aftecwardsf
-<-The mi^rity were standing.

Was the room as fiill as it would hold?— >
It might have held more ; but it was thronged.

Mr. Guest was with you the whole timef
-^Hewas.

You had each of you, therefore^ the same
opportunity of hraring ?— To be sure.

You have repeated all that yon heaidf-^
Allthatliecolkct. >

9091

Jbr ttdliiaiu Wardi.

A. D. 1707.

[010

' Ifaof tfaiBgelM bad been said mora ma*
terial, or as material, itmutt have struck^ou ?
*«I did iiet go there for the purpose of giving

IDIOfUatlOD.

Yea did not go there for the porpose of

S'ving information i I take it for granted you
d not go with any great friendship for
Mr. Binns» or for the doctrines jrou eipected
lie wodd deliver ?— I had no personal enmitjr
to Mr. Binns.

Bot to his political opiniotts you were rather
iMwtile^—Imustown Iwas. ^

Do you know whether there was a society
meeting at Btrroingham before Mr. Binns
?— «I never hem till then that there had

been a meetins.

Play, sir. did you take any notes inwritingf
--I did.

How long was it after the meeting before
you made any notes in writing r — ^As soon as
I knew it was likely I miaht be called upon.

How long after was it ^— I cannot eiactly
teU.

Be so good as to speak to the best of your
reeolleetion ? — I reallV cannot telL

Was it a month afterwards ?-'It was not a

SMOth.

And you had not till then taken any notes?
«— Not HU then.

1 understand you it was nearly a month be*
lore you made ^our notes. Now are you cer-
taitty at this distance of time, that he made
use of tha words, ** his majesty and his mi-
nisters ?" — Yes, I am.

Did he not say bis m^estj akme?— To the
best of my knowledge besaidbis miyestyand
bis ministers.

Iftr. Sutton, I am not attacking your repu-
tation ; but jdo you mean to swear that he
said hb miyesty and his ministers ?— -To the
bc»t of my reeolleetion he said so.
( You. will not, therefore, take upon ^rou to
awear that be did not confine it to his ma-
Jeatv alone ?— I cannot swear that
. You have spoken of a pamphlet ; prav do
you know whether it was one publisned by
the Friends of the People ?--I cannot say.

Bef^amin Sutton re-examioed by Mr.

Balguy.

You say it might be a month after the
•meeting when you made your notes ?*— Not a
month. .

You have said that you were iaa sitnattoa
where you could hear the very words?— I

• Thou^ you have mven us all you know to
rthe best of your reeoMction, you do nbimean
%» say, that anothet might not leeollect more?
M-No; certainly not

DzFBtrcc.

Mr. Eamilfy.'^My Lord and OentleeMB
.of tbQ J^iry;— In tlus case you will observe,
that mo/k ott)y . Iiaf the ovidence which ypu
•liiftve beaid varied as to the mard§ contabied
,<pi -aliitfia. cottBlBof lifM indictmea^ but Ibe

yOLXKVL

witnesses themselves have varied materially
from each otbier. In the first pUu:^ the de«
fendant is charged in the iodfictment with
having said, ^ that his nuyesty and his mi-
nisters are well convinced that annual parlia-
ments and universal suffiase are mostcon*
ducive to the happmesa of his people, and
have granted it to Corsica, though he hss
vithheid that right from his natural sub-
jects." Two witnesses have been called to
prove these words-**In the first place, Mr*
Guest says, that the words spoken were, that
his nuyesty was aware (not coupling the nanm
of any other person with that of bis m^jes^,
although his rn^esty and kii nUntMUn are the
words laid in the indictment) that such waa
most conducive to the happiness ot his sub-
jects;— this is very dtraent firom what is
stated in the Indictment : but the evidence of
the other witness, Mr. Sutton, is totally dif-
ierent : for instead of sayine that it is most
conducive to the happiness of his people, he
says, it is not inconsistent with the happiness
of bis people. Now there is a great difference
between these eipressions ; for there ia cer*
tainly no crime in withholdinjg from hb peo*

Ele» that which is not inconsistent Vith their
appiness; for though it be not inconsistent^
it ma^ not be absolutely neoeswry for thdr
happiness. And there certainly is a moat ma*
tenal diffinenoe in not granting that wiuch is
necessary; from withlM>lding that which b
not inconsistent. Thus you observe^ gentle^
men, that neither of the witnesses swear to
tbewordsin the indictment; and bothma«
terially contradict each other: these words
contained in the second count of the indict*
ment^ therefore, are not proved.

I proceed, gentlemen, to notice the words
contained in me third count. ** Our object is,
to obtain it by eveiy peaceable means in our
power, for it would besbocking to bu*mmity
to shed the blood of our fel&w creature?;
but if they continue obstinate, and there
should be a time when force is necessary to
be used, I hope there ia not a citizen in the
mom but would shed bis last drop of blood,
either in the field or on the scaffold.''
. Gentlemen, only one of the witnesses a^
tempts to prove these words, it is Mr. Guest,
and he says, that the words were, if their op»
ponents continued obstinate, and so forth;
these, gentlemep, are the very words. The
witness says, he recommended them to use
aJl the pmceable means in their power; but
if their opponents continued obstinate, and
there should be a time when force is neoe^
sary to be used, and so forth.

1 think, gentlemen, I need not tell vou,
that these words are very different from tnom
stated in the indictment, and will bear a vety
different meaniag. You will be told, per-
haps, by my learned firiendi that th^are the
same in efi«ct ; but this is not to the purpose.
You, gentlemen, are only to ju4p or the
words, and not what eflecl tbej might possi-
bly piodiioe^ surely it ii haifllj aecessai/
UK

<I1^I] 57 GEORGB IIL

totoy this, at ^is timeof dty. Their ma^
aeots night not meftn hU majesty and m
ministers — ^it might mean any other opponents
to legal and constitutional measures: and with
respect to what is contained additional in the
first count, it can only he considered as form-
ing part of an abstract proiMsition, which can
have no particular apphcation to the present
The exact ^oids of the witness are,

that had our ancestors been fearful of layine
down their lives for the public good, we should
not have enjoyed many of the privileges we
do si this day. ** Though the blood might
fbltcmthe axe, and stream down the block,
it would sprinkle the earth, and a tree would
arise whose branches would extend to fu»
ture generations." You see, gentiemen,
that in this connexion the words contained
exclusively in the first count of the indkt-
ment, onl^ fi>rm a part of an abstract propo-
sition, which has no immediate reference to
any particular case ; and therefore, gentiemen,
firom these considerations, I take upon me to
say, that the charge contained in the third
count of the indictment also is not nroved.
* I now come, gentlemen, to the fourth and
last count ; the words here are—" If the sol-
diers were called upon to act against you, like
the national guards, who were caHed upon to
fire on the people in the outset of the revolu-
tion in Fraiide, thev would not dare'to draw
the trigger, or push the bayonet against the
preservers of their freedom and their liberty.''
' The words of the first witness are-~if they
(the soldiers) were called upon to fire on the
people, like the soldiers that were ordered to
fire upon the people in theonset of the French
revolution, they woqld not dare to draw the
trigger, add so forth.

Hero we have three variations— onset in-
stead of outset; soldiers instead of national
Kuards; and fire upon instead of act against.
Now there Is a great deal of difference in these
terms, and they can never be used with any
propriety the one for the other: the national
guards of France were very difierent from Uie
soldiery, and were a kind of national militia,
created for the purpose of supporting the re-
volution : no soldiery, bearine such a name,
liad any existence in Fiance oefbre the revo-
lution. Onset means an attack, an assault ;
«nd had this word been used in the indict-
ment, it must have been accompanied with
an innuendo, which we do not find there.
Tou will tberefi>re observe, pntiemen, that
the evidence of this witness is by no means
conclusive.

Mr. Sutton, the second witness, hi^ proved
nothing at all, except that he made nseof the
words << national pards;'' staling tiiat some-
thing had passed m France, without any al-
lusion to any thing in this epuntry ; though
mv learned friend put that qaestion to him,
which the witdess eoold not answer. I sub-
mit it to your Ibrdship ; afier the crown evi-
dence have thus varied from each other, and
hoth of thepi firom the iiultcloieDV wbetber

rrtdqfJoknSbm^ {Sit

there is evidence suflbaent to refelt tkls cast
to the gentlemen of the jury.

Mr. Justice JiAAttfit.— I should be glad lo
hear what the counsel for the .prosMulioii
have to state in reply.

The Honourable <S|poieer Perceeo/^— *My
Lord, and Gentlemen of the Jury*— My leam»
ed friend has been endeavouring to ^fablidi
a mode of proof, which would make it abso*
lutely impossible ever to obtain conviction—*
That if there be tiie slightest error in recol-
lection, the smallest slip, the most trivial vt^
riation in words, it shall not amount to a
legal proof— but ^ntiemen, it is notnecessary,
as my learned friend well knows, to paove
every word ; it is sufficient if enough be proved
to enable the jury, to form a judgment, as to
the guilt or innocence of the defendant ; and
upon this ground I am ready to meet my
learned friend.

And in the first place, with respect to the
matter contained in the second count s — the
first thins to be noticed is the witness's leav*
ing out the word ministers, omitting to speak
distinctiy of his mi^estyand his ministers,and
saying it was his majesty alone:''— the next
variation is aware ; instead of being well oami*
vinced. . Gentlemen you will observe that
what is defective in one witness, is supplied
by the other ; and this ou^t to be satisfec*
tory, even were the.varialions more mateiiaL
Can it be doubled that the words aware, and
well convinci»d, in this conneskui, meanei«
actly the same thine f

Again; the peopte, and his subjects, are
words importing exactiy the same thias in
this connexion. The same argument wiU ap*
ply to the expressiOBS, most condocivey and
not inconsistettt; the difiereace is not mate-
rial.

With respect to the third count, the only
question is whether their opponents, which
are the words used by the witness^ mean hb
majesty and his ministers : my learned friend
here speaks with great confidence, and savs,
they may signify anv other opponents to le*
gal and constitutional measures ; but in this
connexion it is impossible to put any such
construction upon them, and if they mean
any thing at all, they must mean his miyesty
and his ministers ; — ^You will observe^ gen-
tlemen, the witness has sworn that tbedmp-
dant spoke of a reform in parliament,. of urn*
versal sufiirase, and annual parliawents, as
ihe bksis of this reform ; that bb m^i^sly was
aware that such was most conducive to the
happiness ofhis subjects, and that all paaee-
able means were to be made use. of to obtain
this end; but if they continue obsdnat^^
whof who continue obstinate? caait mean
any thmg else than his majesty and hb mi-
nisters ? I am Sure, gentiemen^ I need say
no more: and do not scruple to affirm, that
this coifnt (the third) b snffideBllly praved,
both in substance and import.

I come now to die Ibwab «oa&t:«»iff tte
sflldiasa wen rsllad mmb la act naiBsfeYmi.

6»]

J» SedMow tfordt.

A. D. 1797.

C6M

ndiolbrth. HmtheoolyTaruKionUUMt
the wof d aoldien is used by the witnesfl, in-
wHmd of nfttioiial guards ; and the phrase fire
vpoo, is used instead of act against them. Is
ItlKMsible, gentlemeoy vou can attach any
wight to obiections niaue on such grounds ?

A great deal has been said by my learned
liriena^ to pm?e that national guards are very
difierent trom soldiers, and that onset is a
difleient word from outset;— you will observe^
genllemen, that the first witness used the
word soldiers ; but Mr. Hottott, the other wit-
Bess, thinks the words were national guards.
A» to OMd and cuUetf I think it totally unne-
cessary to trouble you fiurther ; and shall lea?e
it to your decision.

Mr. Romiliy, — ^My Lord, and Gentlemen of
the Jury. I shall take up little of your time
in answering the objections of my learned
friend. He has shown you what dangerous
consequences would followif prosecutors were
to be bound up too strictly to truth. I am
fluie there have been causes enow of this na-
ture of late, and certain it is, there never has
been a cause of this kind come before the
courts, wherein this ol^ection has not been
uraed.

It has been stated to you, gentlemen, that
18 the variations which I pointed out to your
notice, most of the words are nearly synoni-
mous. My learned friend well knows, that
if this man should have the hard fortune to be
cenvicted, which I hope and believe he will
not, the Court of King's-bench would be called

ra to inflict the severest punishment which
laws have put in its power; and your lord-
ehip, sitting in the court of King's-bench, well
Jmows, that you would be told, in express
terms, that this man had the impudence to

arsoand so. Your lordship would not be
led upon to pass sentence according to the
•videnoe which had beenadduoed, but accord-
ing to the words which are to be found on
the reeords of that court (in the present cause),
it being presumed that the words on the re-
cord, and those only, were or could be the
words which the defendant could be found
guilty of having uttered ; and these words
would be rung m your lordship's ear, as the
snoet daring and inflammatory which could
possibly have been delivered. You have been
told that opponents in this case means exactly
the same thing as the king and his ministers,
and it will be said, in exptess terms, that he
boped there was not a dtisen in the room but
woaM be wilUng to shed his last drop of
blood in resisting the attempts of the king
mod his ministers. But will any one say that
the words, ^ their opponents,*' must necessa-
lily mean the king and his ministers P or can
■nv person of common sense for a moment
believe that it can possibly mean them f

Tlienext trariation is with res^t to the
vfotds sobicetsand people. In this place the
word may be applied as an abstract term to
feople in merai ^ and may also be applied,
«Mi cqoia' propriety, to the people or any
ether country, as to die people of England.

With respect to the fourth ooufi1» I b^
leave to repeat the words of the first witness;
and as to the second, he does not attempt to
prove any thing i The words of the first ar^
that whether a man wore a brown coat, a
black one^ or a red one, his feelings were the
same; and if tb^ were called upon to fire on
the people, like the soldiers that were ordered
to fire upon the people in the onset of the
French revolution, they would not dare, and
so forth : now, is there no diflierence between
these words, and those contained in the in-
dictment? must they necessarily, or can they
possibly be tortured to mean the same thing f
Your lordship observes, that what goes m-
fore is not soldiers, but '' whether a man weart
a black coat, a brown coat, or a red one***
I%ey is a relative term which may relate to
any citizen of a state, of what profession so-
ever he be; and this sense ought to be put
upon the words as most obvious and patinaL
It is true, as my learned friend argues, that
the oue^tion is not whether the words be li*
terally proved; but I contend that neithec
the substance nor (the import of the words
have been proved ; and nothing can be moro
dangerous than the doctrine which has been
advanced by my learned friend, and the pre*
cedent which he wishes to establish.

Mr. Justice Ashhurst conceiving that the
counsel wished to rest the merits of the case
on what bad already been advanced, was pro*
ceeding to address the juiy, when he was in*
lerrupted by

Mr. Romilh^^lfyoat lordship thinks there
is any thing for the jury to decide, I mean la
address them.

Mr. Justice JMAiinr.— I shall certainly re-
fer itto the jury: by the late act of |>arlia-
ment, they are the judges of the meaning aa
well as the fact.

Mr. Amrn/Zy.— My lord; I submit it to your
lordship with great deforence, that, that act
of parliament relates onlv to ubcls. Libel is
the word every where made use of.

Mr. Justice JfAAnrsrw^-Tbis is a libel.

Mr. Jkaii%— No, my lord, this u an in-
dictment for. words charged to have been
spoken, which is a materiu difference.

Mr. Justice iltMttrif.— Make yourspeech,
I shall then address the jury.

Mr. Romilfy.r^'Yom lordship, then, thinks
there is no force in the legal objection ?

Mr. Justice ^AAanT.— If the words proved
are the same in meaning, though not the pre-
cise woids charged, the jury must decide.

Mr. i^»%.— Gentlemen of the Jury., u
this cause were to be deckled bv party spirit,
or pr^udice, it would be to litUe purpose ta
set up any defence; but I have not the least
doubt, gentlemen, but that you will discharge
from your minds every thing like party spirit,
and aa much as in your power lies, divest your^
selves of any pnyudicea which you mav have
imbibed against the defendant ; and I have
no doubt but your decisk>n wiU be what it
ought to be s and wlnnl consider upon what

$isi

87 GE0K6B IIL

Tritil ofjokn Bimi

[616

flimsy tfltthnony the charges rest, and recol-
lect what substantial evidence I might adduce
on the part of the defendant, I am convinced,
gentlemen, whatever may be your dispositions,
and however prejudiced against the defendant

C^ich I dare say is not the case) when you
ve maturely weighed in your own minds
the whole of the evidence, I am convinced, I
say, that you cannot honestly dischaise your
dutv before God, and your country, uiues you
find a verdict for the defendant.

In what I have to say to you, I shdl not
endeavour to inflame your passions, or biass
your judgment; but shall confine myself
strictly to the evidence. I shdl not endea-
vour to prove that the doctrines to be found
in the indictment, is any thing like genuine
patriotism. Mr. Binns has not instructed me
to defend those doctrines. What I am [to
vrove^ and what I hope to prove before I have
done IS, that neither the words, nor the sub-
atance of what is stated in the indictment,
were spoken by the defendant, in the manner
or with the intention there stated.

You miebt observe, gentlemen, that I did
not press tne witness!* much in my cross exa-
mination ; but I think 1 can prove that he has
not spoken the truth, but that he is peniired ;
and this I can prove from his own evidence
aione.

He has repeated ta you what he heard in
the course ofa very k>og speech: and he does
not pretend to deny that there are frequent
chasmsj^that he gives you only detached parts:
be does not undertake to prove that they fol-
lowed one another, or that they were spoken
in the same order. When I asked him whe-
ther he had learnt what he had to say by
keart, my object was to know whether he had
been instructed, or had spoken from recollec-
tion. I should have been extremely glad to
have seen his notes ; for it is plain that the
contents of the paper that has been put into
his hands, constitutes his evidence, and not
^ what he recollects. It appears he has been
extremely -careful to preserve his notes, but
has not brought them on the only material
occasion ; and you see, eeotlemen, that this
was not done accidentally, but on purpose,
lor he told us that he did not bring them to
the last assise. So tliat you perceive, gentle-
men, he invariably leaves his notes at home,
whenever then is a probability of their being
called for.

- I shall prove, gentlemen that he is perjured
and that ne epous from the paper, and not
from his recoUectton. There is a material
proof of this in mistaking the word onset for
outset ;^ it is impossiUe^ ^tlemen, for a man
to haVe fidlen into this mistake^ but in oonse-
^ence of learning by heart i and in reading
or recollecting what ho had read it is very
easy for ham to mistake the word oiuet for
Mcftef , or omim for ooisr. He now swears po-
Mtively that the word was muett and tins is

* Joseph llnon Gucat

demonstration to my learned Inend; but I
ask how came the word tnUtet into the indict-
ment, which was evidently drawn from the
testimony of this witness.

Mr. Justice Aikhunt^^lt it atuet in the in-
dictment !

Mr. l{oNit%.— No, my lord oalMf. I shall
say something on the learned judge's having
left it to you to decide, whether the words are
in substance the same ; but I shall not doit
at this moment.

There are only two witnesses which are
produced on the part of the prosecution. Mn
Underbill was present, but ne is not«cailed ;
and there can be no other reason why he is
not called, but that he would have disproved
what the others hkve sworn; for if the prose-
cutors have been at the trouble to bnne to
the assises a madman, in order to see wheSier
he would have any lucid interval, in which to

five evidence, certain it is, they would have
rought Mr. Underbill, a man who is in hia
senses, if he Could have proved any thing;
and a man whom they might easily have pro-
cured (if they had wished) as oneof the crown
evidence acknowledges he saw him in Bir-
mingham a few days aco. There were also
other persons who might hate been bronght
here to give evidence. Mr. Wooldridge^ too
keeper of the prison, and Mr. Taylor tma Mr.
Atkins, the two constables were present It
must be granted, that these would have been,
on raan^ accounts very proper persons. Miw
Wooldndge I saw this mommg myself in
court, and he must have been extremely
proud, to have been called, on this occasion,
to prove his loyid^ ; and why he is not, I
can give no other reason than what I just now
statM ; namely, that he could prove nothing
tocriminate the defendant.

You will observe, gentlemen, that in ask^
ins the number of the compan^ present, aa
falling within the kte act, I did it only to
show that the room could not possibly con-
tain that number; because our cause, in some
measure, depends upon discrediting tbocrswn
witnesses.

With regard to the notes of Mr. Suttoo,
they would have been of no use because tliej
were made at too great a length of time afker
the meeting.

Gentlemen, you have, doubtless, paid pai^
ticular attention to what has been said re»*
pecttng the variations in the evidence and the
mdictment* Let me ask you, gentlemei^
whether you can posnbly think the worda
amare, and tM^tawvinetdf mean the same
thing ?— but you must say Uwtthe^ mean the
same thing, or you cannot convict the d^
fendant:— you must also say that not sacoa-
uUeiU and meir coaAicioe. mean the same
thing; and as ray learned friend wooUhavo
you, you must also say that ense^ and tmiiei
mean the same thing; and you nnisl ms that
mUditn and mtHomaTffiMKf^i mean exaoUy tho
same thing. If the mat witness aptakatnitlb
thfTlast^kieanot; and if tho last speaks tintk

«73

J^ attttnom W^§nU»

A. a i7or.

Vnt

IbefirsldoMOot Gfinliflnea, if on this evi-
deoc0 you convict the dafendutt, no ntn will
beaalc. One mui may wythi8--'iuid another
may my that^it may be carried, by some in-
ibrmer, to the treaMiiy, and both may be con*
vkted on the evidence of words totuy difo-
ont Irom what they had delivered. The pro-
secutor acts without restraint <-he endeavours
to eatenuale now, by-and-by it will be hb iiih
iwest 4o strengthen— and gentlemen^ if on
auch evidence as has been a&uocd, you con-
vict the defendant, it will be most dangerous
for a person to use any eipression, whicn has
the Slightest dhision to public aflBurs.

If. after all, these variations ace only the
Jesuit of accident, Imustsay it b a very sin-
gular accident As to the expressions rela-
tive to Corsica, I would here just observe,
that there may be no crime iu withholding
that from one country, which is granted to
another; for it might happen to suit the in-
terests of one country, ana not of the other.
There b a material difilBrence, jgentlemen, be-
tween establbhing a constitution for a state,
which for the first time comes under your do-
minion, and making alterations in a oonstitn*
tion which has been long settled. Oovem-
saent might, therefore, withhold this privi-
len, and yet be entitled to veneration.

1 now proceed to notice the words sworn
to by the witness, relative to the third count

** But if their opponents continue obsti-
aate,'' and so forth.

Now there are two ways of explaining thb
passage— he midht mean literaUy what he
aaid, which I & most firmly believe— the
other sense b that gentlemen, which my
learned friend puts upon theln ; and here let
me complain, that he has said so little at the
0|ieniog of thb prosecution, doubtless it is,
oecuise he has reserved himself for a reply,
when he knows I can have no opportuniqr to
answer him.

But in whatever sense the expression might
have been used, the principle must in its own
nature be Rood : observe, pntlemen, the a^
gumeuls of the learned special pleader, do you
suppose it possible tliat a man can be always
mistaken? You are to consider, gentlemen,
whether the word opponents in thb place,
could mean the king and his minbters; or
whether it roisht not possibly mean that a
Jaioe party in thb coon^, who oppose, with
violence, even the roost legal assocbtions,
when they are associated for the purpose of
obtaining a parliamentaiy reform— that party
whose prejudices prevent them from doing
justice to the i^ink>ns of others, when they
diftrfiom those which they thenuelTes pro-

I need not tell you, gentlemen, that Bir-
mii^ham b a place where violence has been
kaown and ielt ; where the most wanton and
Aagfant breaches of the public tranquillity
iuuie been coounitted, under the influence of
bliiyl prejudice, inflamed by the artfiii and
Sim. jnterettpdt whore innoeenot and virtue

have been injured, under the mask of as at-
tachment to the {government

You are now m your consdenoes to say^
that because a man has been talking of the
king and his ministers, all that b stated by
the witness to have been said alluded to the
king and his ministers— if there b one of
you, gentlemen, who can sleepin hb bed after
saying this^if disconnected sentences are
thus to be dracnd out for proof, you must
suppress all pub&c conversatioiL For God'a
salce, though we are slaves, let us- not be in-
tentionally so I

I proceed to the fourth count I am tirsd,
gentlemen, of repeating to you the word»—
no man in this country can be so ignorant aa
not to know the difimnce between aoidiers
and national guards -and as to mai and
ouUetf I leave it to you to decide. Enough
has been said.

[Here Mr. Bomilly consulted vnth Mr.
Binns for a few minutes, and then pro-
ceeded.]

Gentlemen, were I to eaerdse my own
judgment, I uioold rest my defonce here. I
think it setting a bad precedent, to examine a
single witness on the part of tJ^ defendant;
but he is not satisfied to obtain a verdict of
aoguittal on the contradictbns of the ctdwb
^idencev but desires (I speak it to hb honor)
to be acquitted soldy on the merits of bb
cause, the justice of^hb principles, and the
purity of his intentrans. He desires me to
repeat exactly what hehassaid ; I shall therei*
fore call all the witnesses. I shall not do
what has been done bytthe other side >— thdr
object b to obtain a conviction. Gentlemen^
the question b not whether Mr. Binns was a
delegate from a London Gorreeponding So-
ciety; much less are you to decide what are^
or may have been, Mr. Pittfs sentiments re-
specting a reform in parliament; neither are
you to find whether Mr. Binns said any thing
about estabUshinu socbties t those are none
of them the questions whbh you are to detefw
mine— thougo, for the purpose of confound-
ing your judgments, those passates have been
introduced; but I am persuaded that there ia
no person among you, who can suffer him-
self to be influenced by any artifices of thb
nature.

Gentlemen, you are to decideon thb point—
whetherthere b not something totallvdifferent
from what has been mentioned. The wholo
depends on Uie three last counts. The second
is respecting Corsica; I think I need say no
more on thb head. You have observed, gen-
tlemen, that neither of the witnesses prove
the words of the indictment, and both differ
from each other. The third count rebtes to
the time when force maybe necessary to be
iMod; and the fourth relers to the oondhctof
the soklbry in a supposable case. Now, gen-
tlemen, unless you can believe that the de-
fendant told the peopb that it was necessary
to use foice to obtain a reforqi in parlinmeni^
you eannol convict hinu

^Joia Biiik9

t6M

no8t rank, opposiog that wicked monsrch.

GentlemeD, I ahtul not dte passages out of
great authors, such as Locke, the justness of
whose political opinions have been sometimes
called in question ; but I shall beg leave to
cite to you the words of one of the learned
judges who presided in our courts, and whose
knowledge of our constitution is universall j
acknowledged. I shall quote judge Blaek«-
stone.

619] $7 GEOBGB UX.

lam instructed to say that Mri Binns dkl 1 sure he has too nnch bonoisti too much p«-
certainly talk about force ; but he did not triotisa^ not to Intve been found in the fore-
talk aboutit asa thing applicable to theob- ^ ' '*^ " ^ . ^ l
taining a parliameiitaiy reform. Our learned
friend would have us divest ourselves of all
knowledge, but what is to be found in the in-
dictment Let us, genUemen, for a moment
examine vrhat was the period at which this
discourse was delivered : it was at a time
when the doctrine of resistance to oppression
bad been pretty much discussed, both in par-
liament and out of parliament;— whether it
was prudent or not to act as Mr. Binns did, is
jiot tne question ; it is Att tn/fn/um you are to
decide upon ; but I must say I do not wish to
live to see the time when we may be debarred
the right of conversing on public afiairs, and
discussing the measures of Kovemment : and
I trust in. God I never shaU live to see the
day, when subjects debated in parliament may
not be spoken of out of parliament

Mr. uipnsmade, asvou have been given
to understand, a very long speech : he en-
deavoured to impress on his hearers, in a
forcible manner, the necessity of using peace-
ablemeans- -peaceable and legal means, and no
other — as the only ones that were likely toob-
tain their end. After hehad spoken aconsider-
able length of time on the necessity of a reform
in parliament, and of universal suffrage and
annual parliaments, as the only radical one,
he passed to other topics— he talked to them
upon those subjects which are, and I hope
always will be most interesting to Englishmen
—the trial hj jury, and the liberty of the
sress. It is mipossible I should, while de-
tending my client, be led to commit the very
crime of which I am engaged lo prove him
innocent God forbid I that stimding in the
situation in which I do, I should interest my-
self in a bad cause ; but though I sav this, I
should disgrace the profession of which I have
the honour to be a member, if through any
motives of prudence, or timidity, I should
omit to state any circumstances which are
material in the defence.

After Mr. Binns had talked a considerable
time of the trial by jury, and the liberty of
the press, he certmnlv did say, that if a time
should come when these, the dearest rights
of Enslishmen, were taken away, he, for one,
would not scruple to sacrifice his life for the
interest of posterity. I am astonished that
my learned friend should treat this as a false
philosophy. I must say, that I profess it ; I
will sav more, I am sure that niy learned
fiiend himself professes it, and if necessity
should call upon him, would practically prove
that-he does profess it My learned friend
must admit, that there have been drcum-
stanees, in the histoiy of this country, which
have called forth the exereise of this virtue ;
ami if my learned friead had lived in the time
of Charles the first, or m the time of James the
second, he himself would have acted under
ihe influenoe «f this principle, which he now
jcaUi Bi8B^Cioii% and false pbiloiophy. X am

• *

" From the Revolution in 1688 to the present

time.

^ In this period many laws have passed;
as the Bill of Rights, the Toleration Act, tha
Act of Settlement with its conditions, the Act
for uniting England with Scotland, and some
others ; which have asserted our liberties in
more clear and em|>hatical terms; have re-

Slated the succession of the crown by par-
ment, as the exigencies of religious and
civil freedom require ; have confirmed, and
exemplified, the doctrine of resistance, when
the executive magistrate endeavours to sub*
vert the constitution; have maintained the
superiority of the laws above the kins; hr
pronouncing his dispensing power looe il-
legal; have indulsed tender consciences with
every relieious lioerty, consistent with the
safety of the state: have established triennal,
since turned into septennial, elections of
members to serve in parliament; have ex-
cluded certain officers from the House of
Commons : have restrained the Idn^s pardon
firom obstructing parliamentary impeach-
ments:' have imparted to all the lords an
equal right of trying their fellow peers ; have
regulatra trials for high treason; have a&
fonied our posterity a hope that conuption of
blood may one day be abolished and forgotten :
have (by the desire of his present mijesty)
set bounds to the civil list, and placed the ad-
ministration of that revenue m hands that
are accountable to parliament ; and have (by
the like desire) made the iudges completely
independent of the king, his ministers, and
his successors.'^

Gentlemen, I shall trouble you with only
one quotation more, which shall be from the
same authority.

^The antiquity and excellence of this
trial" (speaking of trial by jurr) ** for the set-
tling or civil property, has before been ex-
plained at large. And it will hold much
stronger in criminal cases ; since, in times of
difficmty and danger, more is to. be appro*
bended from the vioienee and partuility of
judges appdnted by the crown, in suits b»*
tween the king and the subject, than in dis-
putes between one individual and another, to
settle the metes and boundaries of private
property. Our law has therefme wisely
pUoed this strong and two-ibld banier of a

S resentment, and a trial by jury, between the
bwtiesof the people, and the pierogstivo'tfr

4»1]

>6r SedUaiu Wardt.

A. D. 1797.

loa

ibficrainL It watnecestaiy'for prasemngi
the tdmintble faalanoe of our eonititation to t
TCtt the Executive power of the laws ia the
pikkco : and yet this power might he dim^r-
0118 and destructive to that very constitutiooi
if exerted without check or oontro)| hy justices
of oyer and tenniner occasionally named by
the crown; who might tben^ as in France or
Turkey, imprisoDy cuspatch, or exile any man
^lai was obnoxiovs to the gOYemmenty by an
instant declarationi that such b their will and

pleanre''

##oooeee

"So that the liberties of England cannot
but subsist so long as this pallamumy remains
aaoed and inviolate not only from all open
Attacks (which none will be so hardy as to
make) but also from all secret machinations,
which may sap and undeimtne it, by intro-
ducing new and arbitrary methods of trial by
juatices of the peace, commissioners of the
revenue, and courts of conscience/'

Now, gentlemen, I shall prove to yon by
the ^vitnesses I have mentioned (many of
whom are housekeepers, and not members of
BOf political dob) that thoush he talked of
resistance, it related to the defence of l>ial
by Jury, tod the liberty of the Press only.
. My learned friend will teU you, perliaps,
that there was no occasion to talk in tnis
manner— that neither the trial by jury, nor
the liber^ of the press, wete in danger; and
that, therefore, his talking was criminal, as
tending to exeite undue fears and suspicions
in the minds of the people; hnt, gentlemen,
thoueh you.be of opinion that.netther the one
nor the other of these inestimable privilej;es
were in dap^r, and though you be of opinion
that in tslkmg of them in this manner the
defendant » was committing a crime, you can-
not find him gioilty of this indictment : fbi*
even supposing Ul this to be true, i^ mubt be
the tubgect of another hadictroent. The
.question is not, gentlemen^ whether the trial
by jury, and the liberty of the press, was ac-
tually endangered, or whether . Mr. Binns
thought so ; Out the queiHioti lor - your deci-
sion is, whether Mr. Binns recommended
ibrce to be employed to obtain a parhamen-
tary reform ; and, gentlemen, unless you are
of oiMnion that he did, yoik cannot convict
him ;— but if, on the other hand, he was only
contending for the right of trial by jury, and
the liberty of the press, so fiir from bein^ cri-
4Binal, be waa acting the part of a good citizen
and an honest man ; and he is neither a good
dtizen -nor an * honest roao, who, in such a
eaae, would act otherwise.

Gentlemen, both the witnesses for the pro-
secution have said,' that the words th^ have
given in evidence, are disronnected sentences :
Jtis impossible to conviei a man on such evi-
dence— the jBaoe expressions taken in a dif-
ferent order, may mean quite contrary things
^— but in this detached and disjointed state, it
it impossible to develope their meaning, or to
itmomt- whether tfaqr hsvo any meamng at

all : and therefore, though in ill these eases,
he might have used the words stated by the
witness (which however has not bc«n proved)
it is impossible to say what was their original
import

Gentlemen, if this were a case in which
you were to decide, afVer hearing one* side
only, I think you could find no difiicuUv ; but
when you have heard the evidence which I
fthall call, you will be convinced that the in-
nocence of the defendant is as clearlv proved
as the nature of the circumstancea will possi«
bly admit

Gentlemen, I do not believe that the wit-
nesses I shall call have taken any notes, I do
not think tbey havo-^I do. not scruple loaay^
that they are men of honest characters, in
every respect, worthy yoiir ctiedlt; most of
them housekeepers — not members of poli*
tical clubsy or immedialy connected with Mr •
Binns.

Gentlemen, the defendant, I must say, ia
acting in the moat fair, open, and honoorablo
manner, by giving the prosecutpra an oppor*
tunity of cross-examining his witnesses ; an4
by submittine the whole of his conduct to the
severest scrutiny.

Gentlemen, this is all I will trouble yon
with : I am certain that in your hands tfao
defendant is perfectly safe. ' .

George Teuton sworn. — Examined'^by Mr,

Romilfy,

Where do you live?— In Pritchit>sireeV
Birtningham.

What are youl— A scfaoolnUister.

Were you at the roeetinK et the Swan
public house, on the 11th of Mareh?*«-I was.'

Were you there before Mr*. Binns camef— l
Yes. ...

How near were yon to Bir; Binns?— Pretty
near;

Did you hearlall that he said P— I did, for
I sat upon a little elevated bench.

Tell us what was the first subject of hia
discourse ?— Parliamentary reform.

What was the first thing dooe? — ^A paper
was read.

Wtittt was it?-«It a|ipeared to me for the
purpose of introducing Mr. Binns to the so-
cieties in Birmingham.

I Are you a member of any socie^ ?— I am
not.

What was done neit ?— He said, that in his
opinion, the only radical reform was universal
suffrage and annual parliaments.

He stated that to be his own opinion ?— «
He did.

What did he say next f— He said that he
was well convinced that universal suflfragn
aod annual parliaments were most conducive
to the happiness of the people.

Did be say that his m^esty or his ministers
were wen convinced of it P — ^No ; I am cer-
tain his words were, that he was well con-
vinced that univerMl suffra^ $xv^ annual
parliaments were most conduavo 10 tbeliaf-
piness of the people.

693} 37 GEOfiGB m.

Do you think that if he had otid his ma-
jesty and his ministers, that it could have
escaped your recollection f— No.

What did he say farther ?^He thought no
person couM doubt of the practicability of it,
when be recollected Uiat universal sufirage
had been granted to Corsica by his present
majesty, as one of the conditions by which he
was acknowledged king of Corsica.

Did be also say that some of the states of
North America enjoyed it? — Yes.

And thence argued the practicability of it?
_He did.

Did he go OD to say that his majesty, or
hlsmajes^'s ministers, withheld that rieht
from ms own natural subjects ?^No; he did
not.

After he had finished the subject of uni-
versal sufirage and annual parliaments, what
did he do next? — ^He made some observations
on the two bills which had lately passed the
House of Commons.

Did he point out any way to obtain this re-
form?-^ Yes; by petitioning the king and
parliament

What did he say concerning the two bills
you have mentioned? — That those bills did
not prevent people from meeting to the num-
ber of fifty.

What more?— He said, if they met they
need not fear the information of spies, so long
as they had a trial by jury, even under the
restrictions of those bills ; and that Eneland
would never be enslaved so long as it has a
trial by jury, and the liberty of the press. *

What more? — But if, unhappily, there
should he a time when the trial by jury, and
the liberty of the press, should be taken away
from the people, tnough it would be shocking
to humanity to shed the blood of our fellow
creatures ; yet, under such circumstances, he
hoped there was not a citizen in that room
who would not be wilfing to shed the last
drop of his blood, either in the field or on the
•cailbld.

That expresaon was used on the suppo-
sition of the liberty of the press, and the trial
by jury, beine taken away ? — It was.

Was it usea upon the supposttien of a re-
fusal of a parliamentary rerorm? — ^No; Mr.
Binns never said that force was justifiable to
obtain a reform in parliament

Durine the whole of his speech did he re-
commend peaceable measures?— He said we
ooukl never hope to obtain a reform by any
other means.

You are not a member of any society? —
No.

• Were you a fnedd of Mr. Binns?— I never
saw him before.

Were you ever at any meeting, either be-
fore or since ?— Neither before nor since.

Oeorg$ Fenion cross-examined by Mr.
^ PerecooL

Have you been in the habit of attending
tablk neetiflpitr-rNo.

TfulofJokkBrnm {%»

A question has been put to another wit-
ness, and I shall put it to yoat do von reool-
lect as much of any sermon you have ever
heard, as ydo do of this speech?— No, I can-
not say I do; because after some time^ when
I saw m the papers that Mr. Knns was ap»
prehended, and I understood I should be sun-
pcenaed upon this business, I thought it my
duty to keep it in memory as well as I could.

After what length of time did you expect
to be called as a witness?— Not for some
months: not till Mr. Binns had obtained %
copy of his indictment.

Had you a copy?*-Yes; Mr. Binns called
and deliveiM it

Had you told any body of any thing that
was done or said at the meeting f^-Yee; I
might have told severaL

Did you make any memorandums ?«-I did
that night.

Why did you make them P— To refresh my
memory.

It was not i^HMi Mr. Binns* bdng com-
mitted that your memoiy was refreshed f— It
was on both occasions.

You made memoranduma the first night ?
—Yes.

Have you got them about you ?— No.

Why did you not bring them P— I did not
think It would be necessary.

Were they notes of what you did or of what
you did not hear ?— Of what I did hear.

You did not note the words ^ his m^esfy
and his minlstere were well convinced,'* and
so forth?— I did not hear them.

You do recollect that he said As was wdl
convinced ?— Yes, I do.

Were the words most conducive, or not in-
consistent f — Most conducive.

Do you recollect these words e ^ It would
be shocking to humanity to shed the blood of
our fellow creatures ?**— Yes, I do.

Were the words used. <* to shed," or ^ le
think of shedding?''— The words, I think,
were, ^ shocking to humanity to shed the
blood of our fellaw creatures.*

Had you lold Mr. Binns what you knew,
before he brought the indictment? — ^No.

He save you the indictaientr— He left it
atmy nouse.

Did he read it over to you?— No, he did
not

Did he make a long stay at your house ?-*
He did not wait at all.

Did you read over the indi^meot atten^
tively?— Yesy many times.

Had he not the cmiosity to ask yeu any
que8tk)n8 as to the wordsf— No^ he bad not.

Pnywhatwasitthatbesiddtoyon?—- Hesaid
he had btouight me a copy of the indictment,
as it was his mtention tosubpesna me; and
requested I would recollect as much as poa-
uble of the dtsooaise which ha had delivered
on the 1 Ith of Mareh.'

Did he say any thing at tte meeting re-
speeting the soldiery ?— He said« ha dbToot
recoflflGt a sk|||to ifistmei^ eimr in

625]

for Seditious Words,

A. D. f797.

[626

or modern history, wherein the Dative sol-
diers of a country had been made to fire on
their countrymen, when defend ine their
common rights; he then instanced tne con-
duct of the National Guards of France.

You are sure he did not say the French sol-
diery } — He said, if the soldiers were called
upon to act against the people, when defend-
ing their rights, they would not dare to push
the bayonet or draw the trigger against the
preservers of their freedom.

Do you recollect any thing about not think-
ing much of your own lives, for you are en-
gaged in the cause of posterity ?— I cannot tell
the particulars ; there may nave been some-
thing of that kind.

But you will not swear that these words
were not spoken ?-^I do not recollect them.

Or of blood following the axe f — No.

•You say he read some letters and papers? —
He did.

Can you give ui any of the instructions ? —
The instructions were only rules laid down
for his conduct, and for the regulation of the
societies ; but as I had no intention of going
into the society, I did not pay much attention
to them.

How long were they being read ? — I cannot
say.

Cannot you recollect any passage from the
instructions f— I cannot

Should you recollect any passage were it
read to you '—Possibly I might.

Can you recollect this [reaSs] — '* This part
of your mission efieetea, you are to strain
ever^r power of your mind to awaken the
sleepine spirit of liberty : you are to call upon
your feUow citizens to be read^, with us, to
pursue our common object, if it must be to
the scaffold, or rather (if our enemies are des-
perate enough to bar up every avenue to in-
quiry and discussion) to the field, at the hazard
of ez termination; convinced that no temper
less deckled than this will- suffice to regain
liberty from a bold usurping faction?" — ^1 do
not recollect that.

Will you swear these were not part of the
words read ? — ^No.

You mean to say that these may have been
read, though you cannot recollect them f —
Possibly.

Did you makeacquuntance with Mr. Binns
at this meeting ?— No.

When did you see him the first time after-
wards?—I cannot tell.

Recollect? — I cannot tell; I kept no ac-
count.

Was it some weeks, or months, before you
saw him again? — I cannot take upon me
to say.

How many times had you seen him before
he brought vou the indictment? — I had seen
him several times in public, but not to speak
to him.

When ha did call, tell us what passed ?—
He said, be had heard that 1 was at the meet-
ins, and therefore when he obtained a eopy

VOL. XXVI.

it.

of the indictment he would furnish me with
He gave me notice that he should sub^
poena me.

Did he inquire into the state of your re-
collection ?— Not at all : when he first called
it was on Sunday, and I was going to church.

Was that the cause why he did not stay ? —
Perhaps it was.

George Fenton re-examined by Mr. Romilly.

You told him you had beea at the meet-
ing ?— I did.

He did not ask you what you recollected ?
—No.

You say he came to you with a copy of the
indictment, but did not ask you any ques-
tions ? — ^That is what I mean.

Did it serve to refresh your memory? —
Yes, it did ; I was convinced immediately on
seeing it that the words contained in it, were
not spoken by Mr. Binns.

With respect to the instructions^ you say
you do not recollect much, because having no
intention of l)ecoming a member of a society,
you paid but little attention ?— Exactly so.

Edward Porter sworn. — Examined' by Mr.

Romilly,

Where do you live ? — In Birmingham.

What are you ? — A button-maker.

Are you a house- keeper? — Yes.

In what street do you live? — In St. PauPs
square.

Were you at the meeting at the Swan pub-
lic-house, in Swallow-street, on the 11 tn of
March ?^I was.

Did you see the defendant there ? — I did.

Was he in the room when you wentf — No,
he came in soon aAcr.

Did you hear him speak? — Yes.

What did he say? — ^Af^er reading some

Eapers to which I paid but little attention, he
ezan to speak.

Row happened it that vou paid but little
attention to what he read ? — Because I was
then engaged in conversation.

Are you a member of any political society ?
— ^No.

What did he speak of when he began?— Of
universal sufiirage and annual parliaments, as
the onlv radical reform.

Did he say any thing about the means by
which it was to be obtained ? — Yes ; he spoke
of petitioning.

Did he say any thing of any other means ?
— ^No, he did not.

Did you hear the whole of his speech ?-^
I did.

Did he say any \hin2 of obtaining a reform
by force ?'-I aver that he said no such thing;.
I am confident of it.

Whence arises your confidence? — I paid
particular attention. I heard him introdure
something about force, but not as applying
to a parliamentary reform.

WJiat was it that be said about force ?-—
What he said about force was applied Xq
tiial by jury, aad the iibtrly of the pr«6s.

t S

6f7] S7 GEORGE lit.

Did be speak of military force ?^Yes ; bot
be referred us to an antiapated period, wbeB
the palladium of our rights, the liber^ of
tbe press might be wrested from us.

Did you hou him say aoy thine about sa-
rrifi6ing our Uves for posterity ?-— I do not re^
collect any such expression.

Dd you remember any thing about blood
following from tbe axe?— Notldng like it.

Let me ask you whether, according to
tbe best of your recollection, what was said
about force referred to a time when we might
be deprived of the liberty of the press ? — It
did; force was not spoken of as applicable to
the subject of a reform.

Did you hear him say any thing about Cor-
sica ? — ^Yes.

-dtate to the court, as nearly as ^u c^n»
^hat he said ; and use if possible his exact
'#ords.^*-'Hesaid he had read tauch on the
subject of 'annual parliaments Md miiversa!
Budraee, and had never heard of any doubt as
1^ their utility, but only as to their practicabi-
lity; now, he said, those dotibts were re-
moved, for the prince of these realms had
gpnted those privileges to tbe ipeople of Cor-
sica, as one of the ootiditinnsor his being ac-
knowledge sovereigq of that country.

Mr. Justice JsAAuTf^.-^Had granted wbat
privileges ?— Universal suffrage and annual
parliaments^ roj lord.

Mr. Romitfy, — Did yOu bear him say any
thine of i^mericaf— He said that the
nortnern states enjoyed that mode of lepra-
sentation.

When the defendant aaid that bit mmsty
had granted these privileges to the people of
Corsica^ did he add thesie words—'' though
he denied then to his natural subjc^ ?*'«—
He did not.

If he had made use of such an expressioii,
do yon think it would have escaped you f — ^I
think it must have struck me.

Did you know Mr. Binns?-«No; I had
seen htm but once.

Where did you first see him ? — At my ma-
nufactory in St PaulVsquare. He was intro-
duced by a friend to see the manu&ctoiyr.

How long was tlus before the meeting ?
—I think it was something more than a year.

Did vou then form an acc^uaintance with
him ?-— Ko ; I did not know him again at the
meeting.

When did you first nee him afterwards?— I
cannot exactly say : I think it was six months
afterwards.

Did you ever see a copy of his indicttnent ?
—Yes; at the last assises.

Did you examine it f — When I first saw it
I paid no attention to it, because I wished to
get myself excused.

When you first examined it, did^ou think
that the wordS| respecting the tine when
Ibrce was necessary to be used, were spoken
by Mr. Binns as applying to 4h^ refusal
of a parliamentary reform, or to a depri<«
valton q^the trial iy jury, and the liber^ of

Tri4d ^JAn Bium

[618

tbe press F^At the^ first mome&l I looked it
it, t was confident the words had no applica-
tion to -a^reform^
Was it a printed copy ?— Yes.

Edw&rd Porter cross-examined by Mr.

Cofu,

You say you were there before Mr. Hnnaf
—I was,

D,id you take any notes of the proceedings f
— I did not.

You told ua of some papers that were
read ; do you know the contents of those pa*
pars? — He read a printed paper containmg
instructiops from the London Corresponding
Society.

How do yoo know what it was, since
you paki no attention ?^I am positive froi^
the title.

Pray how loitt did tbe reading of Ibese pa-
pers take up? — Not long; about ten minutefi
or not quite so much.

You say you reaEMmber veiy little of the
contents ofthe pajNNrs which were read ; bow
comes it, Mr. Porter, you are so correct as ta
the words spoken ?-^Mr. Binns furnished ma
with a copy of his indictment, and as some of
the words spoken were the same as these
charged, though delivered in a difierent coa-
nexiouy the r^ing of the indictment xeple-
nished my memorv.

Did you bear him say any thing about
CornwsLi], or about the number of electora?-*
I believe he did, but cannot charge my me-
moiy with the particulars.

Was any thing said about Scotland ?•— No^

Are you certain nothing was said about
Scotland ? — I recollect nothing.

Or of the ipiyori^ of the House of Com*
mons being returned by five hundred per-
sons ?— No.

Will YOU swear that such words were not
spoken by the defendant ?— No, I will not.

You have sworn that nothing was said
about force in oase of a re^sal of a relom e
pray what did he say about foret.-^Repeal
his words as exactly as you can?— -Ha saiOf if
a time should come when any minister should
be daring enough to wrest from us the right
of trial by jury, and the liberty of tbe pecss,
he hoped there was not a citizen in the room
but would shed his last drop of blood in de-
fence of these rights.

Was this spoken before, or aibsr he bad
, been talking of a reform in parliament?— 1ft
was some time afterwards.

Did he not say something about the sol^
diery? — Yes; be referred us to the conduct
of the national guards of France, when they
were ordered to Are upon tbe people.

Did you hear him say hia majes^ and bis
ministers were well convinced t^At univenal
sufirage and annual parliaments were most
conducive to the happiness ofthe people* an4
had granted them Xa kbe Coirsicaas. but
refusS them to his natural suluf cU h— liOf I*
did not

•*»]

fit JkdMonU WiAiu

Will ^ fiPMrthal he did Dot utter these
wpreauoiiB ? — I will.

Then you hewd nothing of Corowali, or of
Ae state of the tepretentetionP^Not Ihat I
remember.

Nor of Scotland ?•— Nothing that I recol-

Will you swear that nothing was said by
the delfendant about Cornwall or Scotland ? —
No; I cannot awear that.

It 18 pbteible he ndcht have talked of the
nepreBentation of Sootjaadyor Cornwall^ with-
out making much imfneaeion upon yoof<-«-
Yee; he might.

It ie Uuwiie possible he might have
ttseerted. thai his nu^esly end his mioisters
were well convinced of the necessity of a r^-
iom; yet this might have escaped your
iieaitngf— No, it is impossible.

Why is it impossible ^— Becanse tlie one is
% fiunuiar sobject, to which I should not have
■aid rnneh Attention ; but the other must
nave struck me forciblv.

Oh I You are very ttunilisr with the state
of the representation: pray how many meoi*
bers does Cornwall send ?««-I cannot say, exr
aoiW. [The witness smiled.]

You are not to laugh, sir : be so good as
etand upright; aad a st^ hisher.^I will
ttandjM high as you please; I wul stand upon
here, if ^rou please. [Pointing to the top of
thejMurtiUon, bebiud which he stood.]

You are a politician, it seems, Mr. Porter;
and I suppose talk sometimes of his m%jest^
and his ministers?— Yes, frequently; espec^
•Uy of late.

Every day of your life?«<-I cannot say
m9vjm\ Idomostdays.

Did the defcndent name his miyesty wad
bis minitters together in the course of his
speech P— Not to the best of my recollection.

WillyottSii«arliedidnot?-*-No; I made
no notes; I understood the meeting was
eaUed for the purpose of persuading the
people to aseaoiale,as the means of obtaining
A parlitimeniary reform.

Did yen understafid the meeting was
called by the defendant, with a -view to per-
joade people to fjetition for a neform ?<— No.

Was any petition introdiioed ?*-No.

Then that meeting was not for the purpoee
4Sf petttleaing P*^ eaonot say.

Have you seen Mr. Binns of late P^^Many
times.

Did you not see him last nisht P<>-No. Yes ;
ibeg yourpaidon. I was ui his oompaoy
about teu miaiKeo at Dr. Bkmt's, where he
called upon a gentleman, a friend of hk.

• Yen liad no aequ^iaitaiace with if r. biADs
l)elore the meeting P— No.

But you kaov him very weU now?— I
have tluit pleasure.

JEdt/HiriPoinUr re-examiQed by Mr. Romilly,

Mgk Fortecy yaa tfaink it wry likely that
Abe deiendant mm|it liaae talked about thei
Alpiieenftatitia^fiSoiawall^^Sootlandy «itb*]

•ut Sxiog your attention, becaMsa on this ob-
ject he could say nothing new or remackabie*
— ^He might.

But not of his nti|iesty or his mioisters, a9
meQlx>ned in the mdi^tweot ?-*No ; it must
have struck me forcibly. .

Henrv Dixon sworn. — Eiamined by Mr.

Reader,

Where do you live P — ^In Birmingbeoi.

What are you ?— An anvil^maker.

Were you present at the meeting at tbt
Swan puDUcvhouse, on the 11th of Mardi P—
I was.

Did you see Mr. Binns? — I did; I was
there bmre he came.

Were you so near Mr. Binns M tp be ablff
to hear all be said ?-^I was.

Did you listen with attention?— I did.

Do you recollect how his discourse be|isn P
*^I cannol pretend to say wliat he said hrst.

Did he cead any instructions ff^m the
London Corresponding Society? — X think
he did.

Do you remember his saying any thing
about a parliannentaiy reform ?^-I do.

Did you hear him sav any thing of th^
means by which it was to be obtained i — I did.

What were they P^By petitioning the king
and parliament.

Was that the only means he recopimended?
-*Yes ; peaceably pelitioninjg.

Do 3fau recollect his saying any thing of
his miyesty and his ministers? — Yee ; he siaid
•ometmag about them ; but I do not exactly
recollect the words.

Did he sar^ they were well oonvioeod that
universal suffrage and annual parliaments,
were most conducive to the happmess of the
people?-— No.; I do not recollect that.

Mr. Justice Ashhura.^Vihht did he say 7--^
He was saying that his majesl^ had granted
universal suimge to the Corsicans, that ha
mifht be king of Corsica.

Mr. Reader. — In the course of that jipeech
did he say that the kidc had withheld this
right from his natural sul^te P— Not that I

Coidd this have passed without your
hearing itP^I think I must have heard it, if
it had passed.

If eueh expnessioB bad been used, do yoo
think vttu: should hove noticed itP-— I think I
shoula.

I wish to know, Mr. Dixon* whether Mr.
Pinns, an any part of his speech, recommand-
ed any oither than peaceable m«aflwresf'<«-
No ; i^'he had, I eboald have been very much
diq^eased, scmI have left the room difieclJy.

Did you hear him say any thine of the li<
berty of the press^ or the trial bv juiy?-i-
Yes; he did say something idKHit them*

Mr. J^tice AihkMni,^^^bat was it he said
about them; say as nearly as you caaP-^
He wassayioK he thought the people had a
right to the liberty of the pfMs and the tnri

631] S7 GEORGE III.

' Mr. IUader,<^J)id he tay any thing of the
soldien ? — Yes.

Was it said after, or before he was speak-
ing of the liberty of the press ?— Afterwards.

Did he say any thing about effecting a re*
form by force ? — ^No.

If he had, must it not have struck you?~«
Yes, it must.

Did you know Mr. Binns before ?— I had
seen him but once.

Where did you first see him; — ^Atthe Poet
Freeth's, in Birmingham.

Henry Dixon cross-examined by Mr.

Balguy,

How came you, Mr. Dixon, to go to this
meeting ? — I went out of curiosity.

What excited your curiosity?— I heard
there was to be speaking by one of > the dele-
gates from London.

Had you heard that Mr. Binns was to speak?
. •— I did not know whether it was to be Mr.
Binns, or Mr. Jones.

But you went for the purpose of hearing
i¥hat was said P — I did.

Of course you took some observation ?—
Yes.

What prevented you when you got there,
from hearing all that was said ? — I dare say I
did hear all that w^ said.

Tell me, sir, did not Mr. Binns begin by
reading some instructions ? — I think he did.

What! are you doubtful? — I cannot be
certain ; I believe he did.

Was there much time employed in reading
them ? — Some few minutes.

Were they read aloud ? — ^Yes, they were.

Pray did you hear this pa.ssage [reads^—
** you are to btrain every power of yoiu* mmd
to awaken the sleeping spirit of liberty"? — I
do not recollect.

Was this read — ^' You are to call upon
our fellow citizens, to be ready with us to

Siursue our common object ?'' — I do not^recol*
ect it.

Did you hear this expression — ** If it
must be to the scaffold, or rather (if our ene-
mies are desperate enough to bar up every ave-
nue to enquiry and discussion) to the field, at
the hazard of extermination, convinced that
no temper less decided than this would suffice
to regain liberty, from a bold usurping
faction.'' Do you recollect any thing like
this?— No,

Pray, Mr. Dixon, do you remember to have
heard thi8^<< But to the end that we may
-succeed, by the irresistible voice of the peo-
ple, yfiu are to excite every society with the
desire that animates our bosoms, to embrace
the nat'ion as brothers ?" — I do not remember
it ; please to read it over again. [Reads —
'* But to the/' &c. &c.] — I do not remember.
Please to inform my lord what you do re-
member.

Mr. Aofiti%.— Why he teUs you he knows
nothing aboutit.

Mr. Btdguy.^l heg I may not be inter*
nipted.

Trial of John Binns

C63«

Mr. AomiT/y.— He can answer only accord-
ing to his recollection.

Mr. Balguy — Give an account of any part
of those instructions you did hear ?— I cannot
recollect any thing about them.

Your memory is «|uite a blank as.to the in-
structions ; when did it take place ? — When
he beean to talk about Corsica.

Oh! then you bcean to awake from your
sleep ? — I was not aMeep.

Will you say that Mr. Binns did not say
that his majesty and his ministers were weU
convinced tnat universal sufirage and annual
parliaments were for the benefit of the peo-
ple ?— I do not know : I do not think he did.

Give me your answer?— I do not lecoi-
lect it

What did he say then about universal
suffrage ?— He thousht it might be done, as
the king had granted it to the Corsicans.

Mr. Justice JsAAtin^— You heard him say
that it was practicable; that it might be
done ? — Yes, my lord.

Do you recollect any thing about the axe,
or the scaffold? Come brush up your me-
mory.— I do not recollect it.

Or about the blood streaming, or about a
tree? — No.

Do you mean to swear that he said nothin|
about an axe, a scaffold, of blood, or of a tree r
—I do not recollect it.

Do you mean that the jury should under*
stand you to swear that he did not make use
of those expressions? — ^I do not recollect
them.

Did he say any thing of Cornwall, or Scot*
land ? — Not that I heara.

Or that the majority of the House of Com-
mons was returned by five hundred persons?
r-He mentioned the number of the House oi
Commons.

And that was all he taid about it?— Ail
that I remember.

And so Mr. Binns came to tell you how
mauy persons the House of Commons con-
sisted of, which any body may find in the
Court Kalendar. Pray did he talk of the
soldiery ?— Yes.

Was it before or after he had been talking
of a reform iu parliament ?— Some time after-
wards.

And what did he say between ?— I cannot
recollect.

I should he glad if you would tell us what
he said about the soldiewf— He said he
thousht the. soldiers would not fire upon the
people, after peaceably petitioning.

And what else ?— When they were coiv
tending for trial by jury, and the liberty of
the press.

Mr. Justice ^siUttrstd*—Ha;re you finished
the sentence f

[His lordship here read over the last words of
' the witness eevcral times, as thinking

they did not make perfect sense. M#.

Bomilly eodeaaroured to. explain to his

Wrdship.j

MS]

Jot SedUious fiords*

A. D. 1797.

[6»

Mr. Justice ^tAAnrfT.-^Was that all you
meant to say ? — Yes, my lord.

Mr. Ba/gigr.^You say it was intended to
petition; what was to be the subject? — ^To
petition his majesty that there might be uni-
venal suffrage and annual parliaments.

So that after petitioning peaceably, be
«ud the soldiers would not fire upon the peo-
ple?— Yes.

Do you recollect any thing about the na-
tional guards of France ?— There was some-
thing said about them, but I do not recollect
exactly what. I think he said the soldiers,
like the national guards of France, would
not fire upon the people alter peaceably peti-
tioning ? — Yes.

Having recollected so little, might not
somethlns have been said which you do not
recollect f— Certainly.

Were you one that was served with a copy
itf the indictment ?««>-l had a copy.

When ?— I think it was a little before the
last assizes.

Who delivered it?— Mr. Binns.

Did you know before that time that ycu
were to be called as a witness ? — No.

Had you ever told Mr. Binns what you
knew of this business before he brought you
the indictment?— -No.

Did you examine it immediately ?— I
looked it over while Mr. Binns was present.

Did you tell him what you could recol-
lect?—I told him I had not thought much
about it

Has any paper been delivered to you since
that time about this business ?— No.

What I do you mean to swear that you
have had no paper ?-^Ye8 ; I am sure I faAve
liad 00 paper.

Has any body told you, in discourse since,
what you were to say ? Mr. Binns, or any
body?— No.

Do you swear it ?— I have sworn it. I am
upon my oath. .

Have you yourself told nobody f— No.

Has any body ever examined you ? — Yes ;
Mr. Tomes* examined me once.

Had you been subpoenaed when Mr.
Tomes examined you ? — i es.

On your oath, had you or bad you not, be-
fore Mr. Tomes examined you, told any body
else what you knew of this business ?— I
never told any body.

How then came you to be subpcanaed ? —
Mr. Binns said he heard I was there, and
therefore he thought proper, to subposna me.

Henry Dixon re-examined by Mr. Reader,

So that you come here to say what yon re*
collect, without having ever said a word
about what you rememMr to any body, ex-
cept once to Mr. Tomes ?— Yes.

Do you mean to say that Mr. Bums made
use of the word force, in the progress of his
discourse ? — Yes; he did say something of
/orce.

* Ajgent to the. Attomays for the Deftodant

What was it that he said with respect to
force.' Was it before or aAer he talked
about the liberty of the press, and the trial by
jury ? [Here the witness paused, as though
recollectii»g.J Endeavour to recollect your-
self, and teifme whether force applied to the
liberty of the press, and the trial by jury? — ^I
think it did.

And not to a parliamentary reform ? — No.-

Jama Phillips Lucas sworn. — Examiacd by

Mr. Romilly,

What are you, Mr. Lucas? — An auc-
tioneer's clerk.

Where do you Hve ? — In Birmingham.

Are you a member of any political society ?
— No, I never was.

Were you at the meeting at the Swan
public house on the 1 ith of March P — I was.

Do you remember Mr. Binns making a
speech there ? — Yes.

What part did you hear of it ? — ^I lieard |hc
whole.

What was the beginning of it ?-^I cantnot
charge my memory.

Were any papers read ? — Yes.

Was the speech concerning a reform in
parliament ?•— Yes.

What did he say ? — He said a parliamentary
reform was necessary.

Did he say anv thing of the means by
which men should seek to obtain it ? — ^Yes,
\(y petitioning the House of Commons.

Did he speak of any other means?— No;
he said those were the only means.

Did he say any thing relative to Corsica P
— Yes ; he said that the grantine of universal
suffrage was the means by which his majesty
was acknowledged king of Corsica.

Did be say any thing more on this subject P
—Not that I remember.

Did he say that the kinj; and his ministers
had refused that right to his natural subjects P
—No.

Were you attentive to his speech?— Not
particularly so; yet I should have remem-
nered this if he had said it

Did he say any thing respecting force, or
about a time when force mignt be necessary
to be used ? — I do not remember.

Did he say any thing, relative to the sol-
diers?— He was pointing out the difference
between foreign soldiers, and the soldiers of
the country ; the one, he said, had the in-
terests of the country more at heart tlum the
other.

Did he. say any thing more on this subject?
—I do not remember any thin^ more.

Any thing about soldiers acting against the
pecmleP— Not acting agunst the people, but
with them.

For what purpose? — ^To defend the right of
trial by jury, and the liberty of the press.

Did what He said about force apply to a
reform in parliament ; or to the liberty of the
press, and the trial by jury? — ^A reform in
parliament was not mentioned at that time.

flS5]

S7 OaOR6£ UL

Triat of John Bium,

fSH

At wkai lime tlvmi it thai a reform had been
mentioiisd }--»^ne wm at the begioDiog of
his tpeeeh, the other al the end.

Dra he, in the courae of his speech, recom*
mend to the people to conduct themseWet
peaceably, and obey the kws ? — He did, re*
IMatedly.

Had you any acquaintance with Mr. Bionfl ?
•«-I never saw him before.

When did you next see him? — Some time
aAerwards, when he put a copy of the indicts
ment into my bauds.

Jama PhUipt Lueat'ctcsa^iBmmwi by Mr.

Clarke.

Vmj what Kyt.of a meeting did yoa ex-
pect it would be ?

pir. Romilly objected to this question ; the
witness however answered it]

ITif nest.— A political lecture.
That was tlie firat time you saw ICr. Binns ?
—Yes.

Howmany pefBOOa were there in the room ?
—I cannot tell ; I did not count them f

Say as nearly as' you can guess?— There
aufljbt be forty or fifty.

Was the room as full as it could hold?— I
4o not ionoHT what you mean ; it was pretty
ftill.

Coidd you have atnek a pin between ?—
CeilMnly.

Then the Toom was not as full as it would
beldf--Na.

Would it have held shity ?— I do not know.
May T aak yoa, did you hear all the doc-
tffinesf**.! waathera all the time.

Did the leoturameet iNfith your apprdbation f

[Here Mr. Homilly again objected to the
question, as improper; but Mr. Clacke
ivessing it, tba witness answered.]

II^Ne«w^U4id not meet with my disap-
probation.

Was not readkig some inatnictions the
lint thing done?— Yes.

What was the paiport of them ?-— His in*
^tnieklons were to paiawade the people that.a
ffpfiwm to parliaoient was necessary.

Did you pay any aHentioB to tne instni^*
tiona ?— Not particolarly.
- Do you lacollMt any part of them?— I do
not

• I abaft read some passages to yoe. Do
yoa aaeolleet ^k f [reads} « Yen are always
to reflect that you are wrestling with the ene*
miea ^tKetmman raca^T— f do not recol-
lect this.

Mr. CbrAr.— >^Not Ibr vooraelves. merely ;
iir you iM|y not sea the full <14y or liberty;
but for the child hanging on the breast : and
ilnt4be^pieilion,'wtiethertlie next genera-
tion shall ba fnse tir not, flMygreatfy depend
4Ni the wiadom and integmv ofyoyr conduct,
in the generaua miesian tmieh "yaa and your-
IsUow ^bputies now take upon yaoiaelires.^'
Do vou Paoolket nothing iiTall this^-^o ; I
<don't recollect a word about a child.

[Reada]-*'' Yon am to sttain every power
of your mind to awaken the sleeping spirit of
liberty; you an Co call upon our £llow citi-
sens to be ready with us, to pursue our coro^
mon ol^eet, if it must be, to the scaffold i''
Ooyouremcmber these words?— No; none
of them.

Then you recallect nothing but that he was
sent to enforce the necessity of pariiamentarj
reform. By what means did you say this re-
form was to be obtained ?-^Tney were lo pe-
tition the House of ComoMms.

Did he aair what was to bedone incase that
BMans Auledf— No.

Do yott mean to awaar that you reooDect
every thing that passed f — ^Not every acUoo^
nor eMTjr wordL

How kmg vat ha speaking P— About em
hour.

You do not recollect all the words? —
Something mkht haTe been said whieh I da
not now leoollect.

Did he say any thing of the king, or hia
ministers?— No.

Will yott swear that, in the course of his
speech, he said nothing of the king or his mv-
Bistersf-p^No; I do not swear that. But I
swear ha did not say what is stated in the in-
dictment concerning them.

Yon say ha was stating the difcenea be-
tween soldieas of tibe eountry, and foreign sol»
diers; wiiatwna it that gave rise to it?— I
cannot recollect: I do not prelawi to gnt
every particular.

You iMive loU UB thai the aoUierB would
act in defiuice of the hbarty oftbe praas, anA
the trial by jwy^ now whaigave rise to this ?
<*^What caMs idse teJt was, hia sajring the li**
berty of the press and the trial by jury might
he aome time or other in denser, and he said
a paHiamentary.raform wenkTaeGnre them.

Did he say they weire in danger?— Na^
he said tb^ asieht be iii danger. He said
the soldiers would assist the peaple if th^
were in danger. /j^

How long Hufn you known what to say? —
Not till this moment

Who gave you a copy of the indictment f—
Mr. Binns.

Than you did not know what yao came
hone fsr?— I knew very well whit I came
here for; but did not knew what I must say.
I could not tell what questions aiight be pot
to tne.

Did yon not sav yesterday, that yen knew
litliaorsiothingaboiit the matter ?«~I might
sayl could be of little use to Mr. Binns.

why then were you afraid that your evi-
dnnoe would beef httle use to Mr. Banns f-«
Because my raeey eotion is not stiong. .

00 yeti mean ta any that your laoollectiaai
is not to be relied ^ ?— No.

What then f — It ia tp be depended upon as
far aa it goes.

Hov men have yau read the Indietmeiit?
—A few times.

When did you tell Mr. Binns what ^
eaidd aay ?*^I newer laU him.

/qt Saliii^ut Wanb.

•373

Who took jour «XMiiiiiatioD r^Mr» Tomes.
And that was the first timeP-^Yas.

John PMlipi Lucoi re-examined by Mr.

Romilly.

Had you before that said, you had been al
thamaetlBf r-*-Mr. fiionshad heard that I
van there*

What did you mean by your recollection
BOlt being strong?--*! mean that I cannot re>
collect the particular words.

Can you tell what was the title of the in-
structions?—No.

Was it '' Instructions to citisen John Gale
Jones?'' — ^No; I think it was to both.

Mr. Lucas : on your oath, and as you wish
to be considered as an honest man, do you
think that what was said about force, applied
to parliamentary reform, or the lib&eiy of the
press and trial by jury ?— To the latter.

John Fnokener sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.

Reader,

Where do you live? — In Birmingham.

What are you ?— Agent to the lirerpool
waitfpn.

lar. CoJIte.— -Hate vou not been in court
during eart of the trial?— >No ; I have been in
tba garden with the other witnesses.

pl)e witnesses on both sides were ordered
out of court, as soon as the jury were sworn.]

Mr. liea^.— Are you a member of any
political society ?-~No*

Were you at the meetmg^ at the Swan pub-
lic house ? — I was.

Were you there at the be^naina of Mr.
Binns's speech t — ^Yee ; I was there before he
eame in.

Did you hear the whole of bis speech ?—
Yes ; I was near Mr. Binns all the time, and
listened with considerable attention t
. What did he begin with ?^He . began by
readine the instructions, and commenting
upon tnem.

Did you hear him say any thing about an-
nual parliaments, and imiversal suiliMe ?-—
Yes.

What did he say of them P— He spoke of
tbem as the only radical reform.

By what means was this reform to be ob-
tained?— By leaal and peaceable means; by
petitioning the House of Commons.

Dkl he talk of oskiff force ?--*No.

If he had, could it iiave escaped your no-
tice)—I think it aMist have malcriaUy struck

A. D. 1797.

C03B

Did he speak of its being praotscable ?-^
Yes ; he pointed out that it was practicable;
and answered some ot^ections to it.

What were the objections? — ^Thera were
several ; but I do not remember them.

Did he say any thinfc about Corsica ?^Yes ;
he mentioned sbmethmg of his majesty and
his ministers having gmnted it to Corsica ;
and therefore ha did not see any reason why
it might not be granted to this country.

Did he say that bis m^esi^ and his mini»«
ters saw no reason why it migbt nolbegfanl«
edtothe people of this country?— No; he
said that he (Mr. Bians) saw no reason, &c.

But, did he say that his majesty had grant*
ed it to Corsica, and yet withli«kJ it from his
natural subjects?—- No; he said no such
thing.

If he had could it have escaped your nollee I
— No ; it could not.

In discussing the subject of parliamentaiy
reform, did he say any thiag of the treason
and sedition bills ?— Nothing, that I reooli
lect.

Do you recollect any thing concerning the
trial by jury, and the liberty of the press?—*
Yes.

What f—He said, if any minister should be
daring enough to tsJie away the trial by jury,
aadthefreed(Mnof the press, and afterwoida
bring the soldiers upon the people, to fecca
them to submission to things opposite tnthe
constitution, he hoped there was not a petson
in the room, but would shed the last drop of
his blood in defence of his rigfata.

So that what he said about force, appUcd to
a time when we might be deprived of the H-
berty ofthepressm the trial by jury P-— It
did.

Do you mean to speak accurately aa to the
words, or the subject on]y^^The subject
only.

In treating the subject of parliamentary re^
form, did he talk of any other means than pe-
titioning ?^No«

Did you know Mr« Binns?-<*N»; never saw^
him tiefore.

Had you a copy of the indictment ?'-^Ye8.

Are you sure that what was sak) respect*
ing force applied to the liberty of the presa-
and trial by jury? —I am sure.

Mn Fawkener cross-examined by Mr,

JrtTC&OtLl,

Are you a member of any pditical club ? —

No. • . . . •

Have you been in the habit of attending'
public meetings of any kind ?-— No.

Dklyoutake any notes of the pfoeeedaM
of this meeting, or nf what you heard P— No.

Did yeu ever tell Mr. Biima what you
knew ?— Never,

When did you first know thai vour assis-
tance would be wanted here ? — ^About thsae
weeks ago.

You were not here at the last asuaes ?— I
was ; but not as an evidence.

Did you hear Mr. Jones's trial f ^«I was pst*
sent in the court about half an hour.

When did you receive a o<^ of the tndvl-
inent ?~ About three weeks ajgo.

Did you ever repeat to any body wtet jtm -
knew ? — Never; but I retained it in my mind.

Who gave you the copy of the indiotmenir
—Mr. Belcher.

In what case do you say Mr. fi&aos talked
of using force ?— -In case of an attempt to

639]

37 GEORGE III.

Trial of John Binhs

tOiO

tablish despotism, and to take away the li-
berty of the press and trial by jury.

Did he say aoy thing of the representation
of Cornwall, or Scotland f — I do not recollect
that he did.

Or about pnople going to the scaffold, or to
the field, or about blood flowing ?^-U« said
something about blood streaming from the
ficafFold.

What were his words; endeavour to re-
collect ?9-I cannot recollect the expressions,
but suppose it was to be in defence of their
rishtsand liberties.

You say he began by reading some instruc*
tions; now can you recollect any passages
from those instructions? — I cannot.

Do you think you might recollect any, were
tliey read to you ?^ Possibly I might.

[R^s] — ^** You are always to reflect thai
you are wrestling with the enemies of the hu-
man race T' Do you recollect this P — I think
I do.

[Reads] — ** It behoves you, notwithstand-
ing, to convince the timid, that no fears are
to be entertained respecting the legal conse-
quences of the information of spies, since the
security of the friends of reform is in the le-
gality of their object and proceedings''?— I
do recollect this.

[Reads]— *< The design of the above arti-
cles is, to remove misapprehensions relative
to the safety of our association, under the
new laws. This part of your mission effected,
you are to strain every power of your mind
to awaken the sleeping spirit of liberty" ?— I
think I do remember that.

^Reads] — " You are to call upon our fellow
citizens to be ready with us to pursue our
common! object, if it must be to the scaffold*' ?
— I rather think this was.

** Or to the field, at the hasard of extermi-
nation" ?^I think I do recollect this.

John Faakener re-examined by Mr.

Reader,

Did you consider the instructions as ad-
dressed to Mr. Binns ?— Yes.

You recollect his saying something about
blood; was it after, or before he mentioned
the soldiery .'—It was af\er.

Has any body ever examined you t — No-
bo<ly.

Not even Mr. Tomes ?— No.

Thonuu dark sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Romitiy.

What are you ? — A schoolmaster.

Where do you live?— In Newhall-street.

Areyoaa housekeeper.' — Yes.

Did you live there in March last?— I did.

Were you present at the meeting at the
Swan public house P— I was.

Did you see Mr. Binns there ?— I did.

Were you present all the time?— Yes; I
was there before him, and went when he did.

Then you heard the whole of his speech ?
—I did.

Had you ever teen him' before ?— Never.

What wsa the subject of his discourse ?«->
A parliamentary reform. ^

By what means was this to be obtained ? —
By peaceable and legal means ; by petitioning
the House of Commons.
. Did -he speak of anv other means ? — No.

Did he recommend peaceable conduct P-^
Very forcibly.

Did he recommend using force? — By no
means.

Do you mean to swear that he did not?— -
I do ; I was very attentive.

Did he say any thin^ about Corsica?— >
Talking of the practicability of what he was
recommending, namely, annual parliaments
and universal suf&age, he said that his mar
jesty had grauted them to the people of
Corsiea ; he also said that some of the states
of America had practised that mode oC re-
presentation.

What else ? — ^Nothing j^laUvc to Corsica,

Did he say, that his majesty and his mi-
nisters were well convinced that universal
suffrage, and annual |)arliaments, were most
conducive to the happiness of the people ?-«
No ; he said that he himself was convinced. '

Do you think you should have heard him if
he had said it ?— I certainly should.

Did he say any thing of his natural sub-
jects ?— Nothing that I remember.

Or any thing of the soldiers not acting
against the people? — He did.

What was itr — It was afler those circum-
stances which he supposed might happen.

Now will you tell us what those circum-
stances were which he supposed might
happen ?— He said that if government should
deprive the people of the trial by jury and
the liberty of tne press, and stop up every'
avenue to discussion and enquiry, in such a
case he hoped there was not a citizen in the
room that would not be willing to lose the
last drop of his blood in defence of those pri-
vileges.

Gmmel, — Continue.

Ifg/aeif.— He said that if the soldiers

OmtueL — Stay — Did this follow immedi-
ately P — ^Not immediately ; it did follow.

(iounuL — Proceed.

IFt^neif.— >If the soldiers were called upon'
to fire on the people, while struggling in the
cause of lit>erty, tney would not be willing
to act against them. ;

Was that all P — I believe it was.

You say this did not immediately follow,
but that something was said between ; now
did it relate to the liberty of the press and
the trial by jury, or to a reform in par Ha-,
ment?— It related to neither: I think it re-
lated to the introduction of foreign troops.

Which had been last mentioned P— I do not
know.

What do you understand by the people,
strolling in the cause of liberty, and the'
soldiers wing unwilling to fire upon them P— -
I understand this; that if the soldiers were

641]

Jbr SedUioiu Words.

A.D. 1797.

[64*

ctlied upon to fire on the people, while con-
tending for the liberty of the press, and the
trial by jury, that, in such a case, they would
not act against them.

Did he talk of it as what had already hap-
pened, or only as asupposable case?— Only
ais a suppoaable case; his words were, " if it
should happen.^

What dm he say respecting foreign troops?
-x-That government was introducing foreign
troops, who, not having relations and friends
in the country, to whom they were attached,
would be ready to execute any orders their
superiors might give them ; but if the defence
of the country were entrusted to those who
had relations and friends, thev would feel an
interest in the preservation of liberty.

And this was said in the interval ?•<— Yes.

Have you made use of the exact words, or
the sense only ? — To the best of my recollec-
tion, they are the exact words ; and I would
just observe, that I have had nothing to as«
sist my memory but the indictment.

Let us understand you ; do you mean to
say, that what was said respecting force, re-
lated to a time when the people might be de-
prived of the liberty of tne press and trial by
jury ?— Exactly so.

Are you a member of any political society ?
— I am not ; I do not know that there is any
such society now.

You were a member?— Yes; but I believe
the society is dissolved; I never attended
more than six nights.

Were you a member before Mr. Binns came
to Birmingham ? — ^No.

When was the next time that you saw Mr.
Binns after the meetnig? — I saw him some
thne after, when he was before the magis-
Iniles, at the Public Office.

When did you. receive a copy of the in-
dictment ?— Soon aAer Mr. Binns bad ob-
tained it

TkomoM Clark cross-examined by Mr. Coke,

'Have you many scholars f — Not many.

Do you teach them latin and greek ? — No.

You teach them politics, I suppose ? — ^No ;
I teach them writing and reading.

You teach them writing and reading, and
you go to learn politics of Mr. Binns P — I do
not go any where to learn politics.

Was it not to learn politics that you went
to the meetings of the society ? You say you
attended but six . nights ?--Only six nights at
the utmost.

.Was it not bectuse the society never met
more than six nights? — I am certain the
society has met since I discontinued my at-
tendance.

Do you mean to tell us you have altered

2 our politics? — If you mean to say that I
^ve changed my political opinions, you are
mistaken.

You are not a meq^lier now ?-«^I do not
know whether they hav^- erased* my name «r
ttOtp buti have iiot alteoded lately.
VOL. XXVL

What was the principal subject of Mr;
Binn8*s discourse ? was it not a reform in par-*
liament ?— Yes.

You saud something about the trial by jury,
and the liberty of the press ; and that in a
supposable case, the soldiers would not act
against the people ? — Not if they should be
contending for the trial by jury, and liberty
of the press.

But you said afterwards it had no relation
to this ? — I said it did not immediately fol-
low it.

Pray what did immediately follow ? — Some'
observations on the introduction of foreign
troops.

How came this subject to bie introduced ? —
I believe it was because it had been discussed
a little before in parliament.

You had a copy of the indictment?— Yes,,
a printed copy.

Who gave it you P — Mr. Binns.

And he put it into your hands, for the pur-
pose of disproving it, if you could,* with a safe
conscience ?— I knew it was his intention to
subpcena me, and therefore I wished a copy.

Have you a copy about you ? — I believe I
have.

Be so good as to show it me ?

[The witn^s here delivered a copy.]
Why have you made observations in the
margin f — ^To refresh my memory.

[The defendants counsel wished to have the
marginal notes read ; this, the counsel for'
the prosecution declined.]

When were these observations made? —
I had made similar ones on a former copy,
and when that was worn out, I procured ano-
ther.

Did you not make these observations last
night, at supper with Mr. Binas?--No.

On vour oath; how long is it since you
made them? — I cannot tell exactly.

Is it a fortnight?— Much more.

Did you not show those notes to Mr.
Binns? — I never did, to him, or any other
person, for I thought it would be very im-
proper.

Did you not sup with Mr. Binns last
night ; I heard there was a' jovial meeting f
—No, I did not ; I supped at a friend's house.

Did you see him last night, or yesterday ?
—I did.

Were you at a house called the Cottage
of Content; on a late occasion ? — I had not
that honour.

Does Mr. Binns live there ? — No.

I believe the Cottage of Content contains
many discontented people ? — I believe it con-
tains a very happy lamily.

Did Mr. Binns ever instruct you how to
behave on your examination ?— lie only ad-
vised me to be cool and collected.

Mr. Coke, — That was very good advice
coming from Mr. Binns, or anv other person.

' Do you know, Mr. Clark, wliere the county
of Cornwall is situated ?— Yes.

«T

<%43J 37 G£OI^G]^ I|L

Did-Mr. Binns. mention Cornwall ?•— Very
likely; F know he mcnlibned Old Sanim,-*
[H*yo WAS a loud laugh Trom cverv part of!
the Court.] ' ^

Did He My how the cpunly of Con\\ya41
came to have so many members; was it by
their spirit of resistance tq oppressions? — I do
not recollect.

Bid he name the king's ministers ?— I ja.-
ther think h^ did.

What did he say of them ?— Tha| they had.
been favourable to the principles of parlia-
mentary ^reform^ before they got intopla^e,
but not since.

Did he say (for it might very naturally,
happen) that his majesty or, his ministers'
were convinced that annual parliaments
were most conducive to the happmess of his
subject^?— NOy I do not remember any such
•irpression.

Will you swear it was not said ?— I did i>ot
bearit.

TA^nf^., Cktrki re-examined . by Bfr.

Mr. Clarlf, I shall, not as^ you a filing, of
irrelevant qu'estioniB, as my learned fricndli3
done; but sb^ll confine, myself to the eyi-
dence. Had you not another copy of tb§ in-
dictment ?-»-Yes.

Were tbejobservations the 's^me on both ?
—The same, in substance, perhaps not ex-
actly the s|me . wprcjs ; I , aip; d^mm ibpy,
apoutd b«? r^a4. ^

You continued ,but.,a, veryiSbpct.tiTO,a
meffiber of the. s<>cielyf--BMt>^very sl^^rt
time.

How long ha4 it existed brfor.e.Afc.Bjmis
came ?— I cannot tell.

The Honourable Sfienccr Perc^i^aL— May it
plcake your Lordshjp.; Gentlemjeu .of . t^^
Jury ; The length of Ihis trial is a preUy.gQod
security th^t I ihall not trouble /ycjiu .with
roai^y observations ^ Jipd ind^^d piany dQ,nQt
seem to mc to be necessary : an^'as.to,>vhat.
Mr.Romilly hsls said, complainfng of hard-
ship on account pf the shortness witjti wWcW
I opened, 1 ;ihink my friend has fully iuslified
me by the length into which he has^gope, I
f(rffborc, gentleman, because if the words be
proved to have been spoken as stated in the
mdictmentj it ,js, impossible fof.ajjy. oq^ to^
suppose it 18 not atrime; and, in,qeed« myj
learned friend does not come here to deny it »
he does not pretend to deny tb^t it would be
highly crimins^l, if the wprO^ were? jip^k?'^;
Wit he comes h^re |o dcnj ,and .disprpve the.i
words. Hdwfaf he (i^ ^^ able to dQ,thi8^

nation^ ^^^*^^^^V^^r}^.y^^ .d^^VfW"

In one instance my lem^./rien4 b«4 ftt-.
Uinly mistaken jnc :— be ^as.made roi^y. ob-
servations on my cainhg the principle gf sa-
crificing our Kr«^./bn)^<^tigjy a bafpnnciplp,'
a monslrous dofctrmf «^^ ?f«^pl)ilP,sophy^,

I cll^fa^f gealkmcq» i^^.s^l.ibin);,t^t{it
is, a falsi: pjbilosophvi aiid . a. dangeroiia . pria-^
clple, tcu^acr^c^ Hi^'iQtejresU oTib^ pre senir
, day to futuril^~-to take care« of. po$tecjty.a^
tlj^ exp>ei2^. of, QUE present, coime^ionsr Ipe
source of, al) our blessings and epjovraentSp
is in the natural rr^peo^^^ics and anectiQiis.
of the human heart; and it is not by ^LidinJL
the^e .einotions. these sensibilities implaiuea
by nature* but b^ giving tbem full scop^^ that,
we are.to louk for the birth of real and ge^
nuine patriali-sin.; for wha) Is, patriotism^ but
those home afi^ions of thf^^hea^^t, ,ej[f andc4
to embrace. n^ore distant obmt^^' Th.U is ihaj
natural prog^'^s.of priAcipIei7-i.nvan..bc;g|nffi
by beingagQ'o4<son, a. good hi^sband, a^9qd'
father, and nei(t a. gpod citizen,; aj|)d.thu8 iia,
goe^on.tQ im^irove those. p(iodp1ifi9|. wbich
Qpd ha,? planjted in .hi« natiice^ ^

T|io5e ^bo wi^h to stifle tbis nincip^a of »
morality, stop. up the 8ource3!ofoup.dfares|>
cixioymeAts; an4. that . whicb tbey intC9dui;ei
in its steady mv&t leaff to conseqqences wpich.
justi/y me. in calline it a false philMophy.
But, g^tlemn« I.aq.not>tbink.t^e, farther*
discussion of this sulject W9rihy,y9ur.att«nr
tion. It will be more , proper to direct yoi^c,
attention to that subject, on. which yon aft,
called iipooy. in . .thc.mo&t^ splemp xna^nei^ to
decide a(;cor^ing to tbie evldepqe.

Gentlemen,' you will pIeASC:-l.o observe^ tipat,
tbe,jquestk)n. at issue .doea not. resii upon,the
identity of .the>ofda, as| »\»\^ in t^Q indic$« •
ment, but upon the application(Of] tbe wonip^^
By .ado^ittingi^tlMs, n^y leaj^ned frieiid^nM
saved me a great deal of troumri ^ AJV^f^Itt
to. admit, .tl^t tht% witnesses for the pfosegii-
tipn have in ^omo djpgcee varied; ha,ve. given «
various. readiQg9K ^s .it. w^re^ of .tli^.tindijcta
ment; and, in tnls respect haifc^ fal)p9iQlA|ik|
very natural en:qr„ wbica ouj^ht by f)o« mfans
to, invalidate the weight oi ttijeir evidence « .
especially when you consider, geotlem.9p,ihaii
this error ha^^been corrected, by ^ the der
fendant's-own witnesses.

Those ,vPfUicular8 in wl^icbow.witnasqqi
ha,Y^rai)e(],,naye be^^ proved by the wijLpessea
of the defipj(i^ant himself. Tl;kia be^g ih^ pv
ture of the caae^ sufiTqr me «tQ lay bcfocejrqii ^
thepnjy qqesjtion.foryour consider^ition ; and
that /is,, wjietlter the. witnef»ea on. our/
side,' or the witnesses on tlie parj. of the i
d^fj^fidifxir arje^imoat correct,, as jto. the,Ap/
pifcation of tbe words^. Tt)is» gentlemen*, iss)
tl^e question;^ not whether the. words pi|iim» ..
biit whether thfey were applied to thiafpr» to.,
tbati^vbj^./ Tbawordsg«nUtm«9»Jl(nMlfet
ai^ |thpsis « resR^cting . the *' sc^iermr m4ii
*< using /qrco^'^, and you ar^^^f tflfcidet fibftn .
ther they were spoken as applicable. lOtftlMH:
formjni pvJiUmeut» or. to tniB{liiiMtjf.«of<jll|n
pKss an4 ^nal by jujr v. »

X^oi^,.in4tM tot ifl9fi9kii beooqMHSJnatMMl ;
to compaVe tbe degree of credit you.wjttbo \
iqdyio«j).to.gM 40 ^^wirnqpsft m tht o«e
si0Mo4/JMl» oUwr^v It basjbeim IihMi^..
clearly pto^Pj Miji4fi^Jk$Ubfi^i^^

♦ s ......

^IM^

yir^sa»htu ^nSti.

Hif)j^ct'£f his nilssft^h^ iTitdioo fnimiidf^teTe-'
liildti to'the liberty of the pr^ss. or iHe trfeil
%y ^liiy, 'for these vere mil ebnsiilerdd^as kt-|
ta^ed ; bot biis bu^nesiB, a& a cfelegdte^ ^s;
to*ct\fdrcc'the necessary of ^arliahiemtfry re--
Hbrtn, and to estaMish cotrespondiitg Sodietic?,
%r the promotion of that object, ^he wit-
nesses, On both sides, tell you this Vv'as tWe
subject, and leading feature of his dwcotirSe.
%n this, gentlemen, they are all agreed; and
it now remains fOr you fo decide, wheiHe
the^ords in question "were, or Wefi? not'ap-
'plica'ble fo it. ^ \

It willte impdssibTe for mc^o 'follow 'th*e
Vilnesses 'for the dcfendaflt ttn-diigh t!j«
vhole <if the evidence, neither is ft^at all nie-
iJessary. 1 shall Just observip, that ' the fir^'t
^itnes^es refer the words in qtiestfon to thie

Jibcrty of the press and tridl by jtn-y, but'the
kst witness, Mr. Clark, dlffeflng from them,
Wd iodfecd differing from troth, tells you ft

8 slated to the introduction of foreign troops:
ere,yod see, gentlemen, thfe witness'es toa-
teriklfy differ. Great pains have indeed been
tftken to procure a sufficient 'nunibcr of w?t-
ifeffltes, tut, in this innance, 1hey have been
Mtiier urtlucky : a greater number of witnesses
liave been brought than ever were b'efoi'ej In
ft xause of this nature, in this court. Mr.
Itdroilly said, thJit one of my witnesses rotist
bfc guilty of perjury, because he said that tlie
Vofrd wai onset, instead of outset, I am isur-
brised my learned friend should say this man
ihustlJegnilty of so heinous a crime as wilful
perjui^, on so slfeht t circumstance. The
6nly ttilhg this trifling variation proves, is,
that the witness had not Icarn'ed his part.

^Fh^^'ditom stances connected with \he evi-
dence of the last witness, oh 'the partofthfe
tefeWdatit, are indeed material, and give more
hrtjm fot suspicion. He comes here, with ^
*bpy '•rffth'e indictment in bis h^cfd— put inio
his h&nd, not to prove, but to disprove the
^rds. What would my Teamed friend have
latd^ if our witnesses had come with copies of
tbfe mdiciment : would hfe or woiild you gen-
llemen, liavc believed one word thiey tnighi
htcve iaSd ? Would yoti hot havc^ believed

8«y bad been learning their hessbtt 'b^ heart ;
)uld you h4ve believed tlikt sudh witnesses
Sbserv^ your crfedit astroitektwcn. No?
it jnust have materially discredited thfeir feVii
fltoce. It is Worth '.vhite^Jgetittettrtu, to ob-
ki^rve tc:Tmt wds done with respect to the first
<irrtne1fe : IWr. Bitins called find piTt a copy of
ihe iffdictmeni into his hands, without wait-
ink eveb to speak a word; btU knowing he
trad put it into safe hands, his tells his attorney
Att m'tghi fiutipcena this man without exami-
Bllthin: now is it likely that the defendant
wtiild Va^e b^en at the expense of bringing
fblk Witiie^^, without once enquiring whether
Ills lihh^ )ib^ thing of th^ matter, aS it is pre-
Uhded tfe did ? I do not take upon me to
ay thstt this jtsm is guilty of perjury, but I
tfittin say ht is not emilled tb Jfotir credit, tm-

'rffteit,ieniemen, thit six wifhesses coqpe
hfe^fe >ithoutiiavlrig ever had 'any conversft-
'tioti With each other, without comj)arii|g
tobtA. arid 5<gtee with such accuracy, wuIj rc-
*s)ieet'ti) 'the getiefal expressions, which thcjy
;sWdar^to;'nrtt agreeing as 'to 'the sense, a](yd
VarVihg as*f p the particular expression, as is
the case with the witnesses for the prosecution ;
you cannot, genilemen.'ifypuhave any know«
ledge of busiOess, or of the hyraan heart, bi-
Tieve that'thcse mep speak from their own
I'ecollection, but mu's't spea'k in consequenAB
df uniform previous instruction.

feentlemen, the nature of the evidence for
the defendant iSjTor the most par(, merely ne-
gative, and this ought lo make a due imprs9-
sidn on^our'minds. Of many material poinfs
'they can Only say they do not recollect such
expressions. Two witnesses have positivefj
sworn that the defendant said his majcs^
had refused antlilal ^Parliaments and univer-
sal sufiTrage^o his Natural subjects^ the peo-
Sle of this cOuntiV. The witnesses for the
efertdrfnt can only sayto this,thit theytlo
not remei^ber such words ; and upon this tfi^
"timony, you are called upon to believe (ifit
be possible ydu cab), that the words were oot
spoken.

The bafe circumstance of a man staniding
up in a public manner, to give lectureis on po-
jitical suhlects, and appearing in the charao^
tcr '6f a dele^te, with instructions in his haxu^
potntedVy addressed to the meeting, was alone
Sufficiently hovel and extraordinary, to hav^
attilicted particular and public notice; fo^
this Was a more uncommon thing than any
part of the proceedings; and yet, When these
^itnebes are examined, with respect to what
they recollect of these instructions, their miB-
mory is eJLceedihgly defective, they can scarcely
tcntember a single sentence ; and why? the
ireasoh t think is pretty evident— they were
hot instructed to carry this in their minds;
and yet, some part of the instructions contain
passages so striking that it is truly astonish-
ing that meb, who nave so exact and reten-
tive memories in other respects, should retain
ho traces of these m their minds. I shall re-
peat one or two of ttie passages; and, gentle-
men, 1 think you will agree with roe, that
they Werb calculated to produce a very cleep
impression. [Read's.]

*' This part of your ihission cffecte<l, you
are to strain every power of ^our mind, to
Awaken the sleeping spirit of liberty ; you ar^
to call upon our fellow citizens to be ready
With us to pursue our common object. If it
must be to the scafibld, of rather (if our ene*

that no temper less decided than this, will
suffice to regain liberty^ froth a bold usurping
faction.*'

Of this remarkable quotation, the witnessee
had not the slffihtest recollection^ but they
h^ve Tiltewi^^ forgotten another which is, if
possible, still more striking.

(Wl] 37 GEOBOE IIL Trial qfSnOm mkimjifr ^SOitiauM JTardt. X^

ticMmmX^ providid jt>ttt(kiiik ther 'iMd ^ ne-
^itioas UAidvney, Md >««re flpdken *hf 9It»
■Dimni uritti Abe iiitemioits laid m tb^ itMkv
unent.

OeaUemeii, the fourth count rehites to the
,aMwry. The words in the iifdictment -are
— '«)tf the 'sotdters were ealled upon to act
KHaiiitt you, like the national ^rds, who
circle called uponto^re on the people in the
(DUtaet of Ihe 'revolution ki Trance, thev
-wo«ihl>not dare to dmw the 'trigger or push
nbe bayonet eeainst the preservers of their
iteedom «fid their liberty/' T^ow, genDe-
men, these words are positively sworn to by
ltiie£at witness (Ouefit) with the trHlin^ va-
44aii»n4f onset for outset. A ^reat deal >has
flMMn«Rtteo868arily<aid about these words —
vn^tkefiartdf the orown-to^persfiade you that
4liKthe? 'anre nearly eynenimous^and-oti the
lp»t of me defendant to jpreve that they mean
imtj tli^rent things. <Gent]emen, you need
■mtgive -ytMinelves «ny 'trouble on this pohn,
Sn thovgh the variation might seem to you
dmial, am sulicient toH:onfirm the testimony
•Wthe witness, «nd indeed, in this place, on-
jai^ Dliglft be very well substituted for otr/srf,
iwvthoat iMKerialiy alOering the sense ; yet, hi
^Aiis'oaae, this is not the point— the question
iaaiot, wbeflier the woras were spoken, for
Jihis » 'admitted by some of the witnesses for
iUie>defendam,'but the question is, what appli-
cation bad'thev ? Did they tefer to a tiine
^vftwQthe people might be contending for tire
«igbt «f trial byjvH^, and for the liberty of the
^pie8S,«r risins in «« illegal and rebellious
3naDQer,to«nrarce « parliamentary reform?
ihr, m il^Mve Already told yon, pentifemen, it
•wouid not -only be commendable, but the
ftwndmi dety ^evei7 man to take arms, and
MBitt the attempts of the executive power, if
It airivie to wrest from the people the liberty
«f Hbe press, «nd tnal by jury ; so it would be
highly <criaifial and rebellions to attempt n
vcformin pavliamem by forcible means, or to
areoonwDend 'forcible measures as « meatts to
obtain itt«-Bo that the queslion here is the
•ansa 4is in the third count, namely, in what
case force w«t lecommendixl ^ jQStifiaft>le to
temn^yed.

How, to determivte this questieti, it will be
•lacassairy ao«ltead very minutely to tiie evi-
•«bnt«. Mr. Guest says, peaceable- means
Mere to Att employed iogain their ends, but if
tbitsa failed, and their opponents continned
•batiMtia, mot w» to be used ; and bein^
Mked what Itieir ends were f iie eaid, nniver
#■1 •suiHrage and annual parlkmenta. You
Imeebatn told that the word opponenis, mirht
«otiiiaan Ills majesty and his ministera. Ton
iwil «Kef«i«a yeer judgmeut on f hit. Mr.

^nwt 'Mitlits, 'iii' bis cttHs^tf3camtMt!on,'ihkt
qjhe patKe ^fHhe <spW6di 'wefe drftachted parts :
«iAl'tliat'th«y'hil]^ IttVe be^ '^dkch ih ra
^tflfererit order frohi what be hi* 'glveh theia
hi'evidence. The evidence of the oth^r wft-
•ness, Mr. Sntton,1s not material ; he dof^s not
swear positively .to what was said about the
^Idiery, or force; hut says the defei^daut re-
deem mended peaceable measures.

The witnesses for the defendant iU Mu
formly i^e in ^ying, that the woi^s we¥o
'not tisea as applicable to ft parliamentary re-
form; end* that Mr. Binns reconnnendea 'no
other than peaceable means to obtain thb
end. It appears, likewise, from the^
witnesses, that the subject of reform
was more particularly treated of in the be-
ginning orhtsspeecli, and the trial byjurir,
and the liberty of the press, at or near tSe
end. It also appears, that the time in which
he talked aboutforce, and the soldiery, was
near the conclusion, if you believe these wit-
nesses. I have nothing particular to remade
as to the credibility ot the witnesses ; theite
is, indeed, a remarkable coincidence in the
evidence for the defendant, which the couto-
"sel for the crown has told you can only be thb
consequence of firevious mstniction. Yoii
rbave also been told that the witness for thb
crown is perjured. On all these points you
«te to decide according to the best of your
jud|nient.

Gentlemen, von have now this Ivh6le olTthb
Evidence. — I shall not detain you any longer.
You have two questions onlv ro consider, fir^,
whether the defendant said that he himseff,
or that his m^jeiTty was well eonViAeed thadt
annual parliaments and univeraAl st^biee
were most conducive to the happiness of the
|>eople, and so forth ; and, secondly, whether
force was recommetided as a means of obtain-
ing a pai4iamentaty reform.

if you are of opinion that it was, or f bat
1l»e defendant spoke the aforesaid words Con-
cerning his majesty, you must convict him ^
but if not, you must give a verdict accord*
Ingly.

Gentlemen, I recommetrd to ybu to rfctSv6
from court, and take time for deliberation I
and when you are agreed, "vou may bring yt>ui
verdict to my ehamberSy Whetei Ihall be iti*
dy to receive it.

The court #a!s adimitned tit ^Ight o^thA
(having sat twelve hoursj; the Jury having
withdrawn to the gtand jury rootn to consider
their verdict, his fordship retired to his cham-
bers, Where be was followed n^ about tbte6
hours by the jury, Wb) tetudledl vdVAct 61
Nat Chnttt.

901 Trmt^^tnomuJVmmMfm Bbu^Jki^ JL. A 17&7:

OM)

621.

Proceedings against Thokas. Williams for publighing
Baiii^V '*Age of/ Reason;? tried by a^ Special Jtiry^ in
the Courts of* KingVBench at. Westminster, before the
BigJbt Uooourabla Uoyd Lord Kenyon on the 24tb day
of June: 37 George III. a. d. 1797.*

lilTRODUCTIQVt

• JjO&bdittineBl wat 9rcla«edi>y lb* So-
cffikfyfweurymgin^'EBktt bia-M^ty's
Pwrhmatfan . agftimt'Vtfe*Mid • Inmio-
nli^«» That > pfoelainatio» caUed aeri-
ow^i,on*all ranks and' d«icrit»fioiM of
awii t» uae thfetr endMurmirs In sup-
massMigaad ^pveventtng profaiieness «nd
Iibm>hcni7, and 'in carrying; inta execu*
tbBall laws iulbrc*. for tlio punishing
apd aupyresiMig'Of tboiojand other ^es.

1%^ jiilgect of tfav. pfOMCtttiott is '<^^The
AfRoiiReaasn^f* paits the- first and^ se-
con^^" wUefaf urporla^ta bt,. '' Ani in-
Tostigatioo of Tiu&iU^d Fabulous Theo-
logX,"

Tbe Flnt Part made its appearance in the
year 1?94» and attracted Jittle attention;
boty in the latter end of 17 05, the second
par( m^ pMblished, aadexcitod a^nch
ral %vdit}/i ;to read the i book^paRticularly
among the middling aad k>wev classes «r

- lilbw 8ooB«ftBr tbe pubHeatinn it -was
i^inlioiied to the Societ^y at several of
tbaiviiaaatiags,' a8.«a • mosl dangerous^
work^and they determined to watch its
progress.— In the beginning of the year
1700, tbe very excellent Answar to it by
a.JearjDed prelate* ga^e great hepes that
tb* poison inatiliedwinto the* minds of
numy of the readers wouM be converted
to a wholesome and sober aliment, and
the Society seemed to think the noisome i
WQtk would of itself dioo away) but they
a«il»i disappointed; for at the €k)M ^of
tkalyaar, they were infiormed 'by many
afibeir moat intelligent members, who
ifpkefrbm their own knowledge, that in
•iVrqraL widely extended parts of the
kingcloinr-Cornwall/NoUingluimi Leeds^
and -many other places— and even in

Scotland, the werjc had been circulated

•

^'Npar^rst published^ from an authen-
^.report, ob%ing]y communioated to m^ hf
lord Erskiae.

with more than cottimoi^' iaddftry,
Msopgft. considerable bediea.* of fpaople,
and was pcoducing, the* most* pefniisious
effects ; and that neweditieoa wera«pre«
parlng^and about to be piibiisbedf)i» al-
most eveiypptft of thacouatiyr Th^So«
cisty then though^ themseKea • cidled
upoato^coana-forwiaid 'to eodeavonr to
suppress -so dangaroua a^mhlicaftibir^ and
haJfing their judgpieatsaAotiiinadi>ynhe
fellowing^.opinioooCMv^ Bagrleyf^ they
dftcected the proscooliea to boooaMMBeed.

** There can bb no doubt that the pamphlet
alluded to may be prosecuted at Common
Law as a libel on the religion of the state.
It was d<icided in Taylor's case, 1 Veittria
80S, and d*Keble.607, that blasipbomy
was not only an offeoce to God and to-
ligipn, but a crime against tbe laws, state,
and government ; and therefore, punish-
able by indibtment : for to say religion ia
a cheat, is to dissolve all those obliga-
tions whereby civil societies -are pre-
served r and to reproach the Christian
religion is to speak in subversion of the
law; and tbe defendant was sentenced
to stand three times in the pUIory,> to
pay a 6nc of one thousand marks, and to
find Sureties for his good behaviour -for
life. In the King agsunst Curlf, Strange
789," the attorney-general^ lays it down
that ^very publication which reflects upon
religion, that grpat bisis of civil govern-
ment and society, is punishable byin-
dit^tment And be mentions an instance
of a man then in custody upon a convic-
tion for writing against the Trinity. But
tbe case of the King ag^st Woolaton,
Fitzgibbon 64, and Strange 834, is deci-
sWe. Hid was • indieted- for -publishhig
Discourses on* tho • Miracles of onr *Sa-

■jf«^y<»w »wp<i»i

•#«.Wi^>pi-«*^

II » »• ■

« -Now (iai9>Mr. Justice Aajrioy^i

t AM^ Vol. 17^ p,:154..

% Yirk^ afWrwaids LM Hardwitkd.

QS5] 37 GEORGE IIL

viour, in which he maintained that they
were not to be taken in a literal sense*
but that the whole relation of the life
and miracles of our Lord Christ in
the New Testament, is an allegory only.
The Jury found him Guilty, and, a mo-
tion being made to arrest the judgment,
the Court decla^ they would not suf-
fer it to be debated whether to write
against Christianity in general was not an
offence; but desired to be understood
that they laid stress upon the word gen^-
rml because they did not intend to include
disputes upon controverted points, be-
tween learned men. And lord Raymond
said, Christianity in general, is parcel of
the common law of England, and there-
fore to be protected by it. Now what-
ever strikes at the very root of Chris-
tianity tends manifestly to a dissolu-
tion of the civil government; so that to
say an attempt to subvert the established
religion is not punishable by those laws
upon which it is established, is an ab-
surdity. I would have it taken notice
of, that we do not meddle about any dif-
ferences in opinion, and that we inter-
pose only where the very root of Chris-
tianity itself is struck at, as it plainly is,
by this allegorical scheme: The New
Testament, and the whole relation of the
life and miracles of Christ being denied.
Upon these authorities it is impossible to
raise a question upon the pamphlet here
referred to. It is a direct attack upon
the whole Christian establishment ; treats
our Saviour as an Impostor, and the pro-
phecies and gospels as falsehoods, and
the effects of priestcraft : I have, there-
fore, no difficulty in saying it may be in-
dicted. But, whether it is prudent to in-
dict it? Whether the prosecution may
not make its circulation for the time
more extensive ? , and, Whether it is not
likely to die away of itself? are points
upon which I can form no opinion:
There can be no doubt that whatever
steps will most effectually suppress the
work, ought to be adopted.

" Temple, John Baylet.

17th Dec- 1796.

The Indictment was found in Hilary Term,
1797, and the defendant's attorney having
threatened to insist on the whole of the
pamphlet's being read in open court, for
the piiipose of re-publishing it in the ac-

Trwl qf Thomas WilUam/or Blasphemy y {Q'M

count of the Trial; the opinion of Mk
Bayley was again taken on this subject
which opinion is as fbljows :

** Every publication which has a direct ten-
dency to debauch the morals of the peo-
ple, is punishable as a libel (and that
thb publication has that tendency no one
of common understanding can doubt) ;
and it is no excuse that it is an authen-
tic account of what passed in a court of
justice. A court of justice, for the sake
of redressing the wrongs of individuals,
must go through the painful task of bear-
ing what is unfit for the public ear; but,
it by no means follows, that because it
must be heard in a court of justice, it may,
therefore, be published to all the world.
Every blasphemou8,|svery indecent, every
seditious publication, if made the subject
of prosecution, must be read at lai*ge in
a CQurt of justice, and if it were a soffi-
cient defence for publishing the trial, that
it was an accurate account of what pass*
ed,the prosecution would sanction the
publication, instead of suppressing it.''

Cou«T OF Krvo's-BEXCH, June S4, 1797.

Coutuelfor the Protecutum.— The honour-
able Thomas Erskine [afterwards Lord Chan-
cellor Erskine] ; William Garrow [afterwards
a Baron of the Court of Exchequer] ; John
Bayley [afterwards one of the Justices of the
Court of King's Bench].

Counsel for the D^eiuiaftf .---Stewart Kyd.«

Indictment stated that Thomas WilFiams
late of the parish of 8aint Giles in the county
of Middlesex bookseller being a wicked im-
pious and ill-disposed person and having no
regard for the laws and religion of this realm
but most wickedly blasphemously impiously
and profanely devising and intending to as-

Birse vilify and ridicule that part of the Holy
ible which is called the Old Testament on
the first day of January in the year of our
Lord 1796 with force and arms at Westmin-
ster in the county of Middlesex did publish
and cause to be published a certain wicked
false impious and olasphemous libel contain-
ing therein among other things as follows
that is to say ** Whenever we read the obscene
*' stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the
** cruel and torturous executions, the unre-
** lenting vindictiveness, with which more
** than half the Bible" (meaning that part of

* He was one of the persons indicted for
High Treason in 1794, together with Hardv
and Home Tooke.. See Hardy's case»aii^a.
Vol. 94, p. 199, and Tooke's cas^. Vol. 3^^
p. 745.

€57]

in ptMUhhig the <' Age qflteiuon.'

A. D- 1797.

[658

the Holy Bible which is called Uie Old Te»*
tatneDt) ^* is filled, it would be more consist-
<< exit that we called it" (meaning that part of
the Holy Bible which is called the Old Tes«
tamcnt) '< the word of a demon than the
*' word of God : If' (meaning that part of the
Holy Bible which is called the Old Testament)
** is a'history of wickedness that has served
« to corrupt and brutalize mankind/' To the
great displeasure of Almighty God to the
great scandal and infamy and contempt of
the Holy Bible to the evil example of all
others and against the peace of our said lord
the kins his crown and dignity.

find Ccu fit, ^T\aX the said Thomas Wil-
liams beine a wicked impious and ill-disposed
person, and having no regard to the laws or
religion of this realm but most wickedly
blasphemously impiously and prophanely de-
vising and intending to asperse vilify scanda-
lize and ridicule that part of the Holy Bible
which is called the Old Testament on the
day and year afore^id at Westminster afore-
said in the county aforesaid with force and
arms did publish and cause to he published
a certain false wicked impious and blas-
phemous libel containing therein among other
things as follows that is to say <* Did the
^' book called the Bible'' (meaning that part of
the Holy Bible which is called the Old Testa^
ment) '< excel in purity of ideas and expres-
^ sion all the books that are now extant in
** the world, I would not take it for my rule
^ of faithy as being the word of God ; because
*^ the possibility would nevertheless exist of
^ my being imposed upon : But, when I see
** throughout the greatest part of this Book "
(meaning that part of the Holy Bible which
is called the Old Testament) *< scarcely any
^ tbios but a history of the grossest vices, and
*^ a collection of the most paltry and con-
*f temptible tales, I cannot dishonour my
*^ Creator by calling it by his name,'' (mean-
ing and intending thereby that throughout
the greatest part of that part of the Holy
Bible which is called the Old Testament there
is scarcely any thing but a history of the
grossest vices and a collection of paltry and
contemptible tales) To the great displeasure
of Almighty God The great scandal infamy
and contempt o( the Holy Bible to the evil
example of all others and against the peace of
our said lord the king his crown anri dignity.

Srrf Colln^— That the said Thomas Wil-
liams being a wicked impious and ill-disposed
person anahaving no regard to the laws or
religion of this realm but wickedly blas-
phemously impiously, and profahely cfevisine
and intending to asperse scandalize vilify and
ridicule the Holy Bible and the Christian re-
ligion on the day and year aforesaid at West-
minster aforesaid in the county aforesaid with
force and arms did publish and cause to be

gublished a certain false wicked impious and
lasphemous libel in one part of which said
libel was then and there coritained according
io the tenor following that is to say '' To
VOL. XXVI.

** charge the commission of things upon the
*' Almighty, which in their own nature, and
'* by every rule of moral Justice, are crimes,
'' as all assassination is, and more especially
'^ the assassination of. infants, is matter of
'* serious concern. The Bible tells us that
'^ those assassinations were done by the ex-
'' press command of God ; to believe there-
** fore the Bible to be true, we mustunbelieve
<< all our belief in the moral justice of God»
'* for wherein could crying or smiling infanta
'' offend ? And to read the Bible without
*^ horror, we must undo every thing that ia
'* tender, sympathising, and benevolent, in
'' the heart of man. Speakinjg^ for myself, if
*\ I " (meaning the writer ot the aforesaid
libel) '' had no other evidence that the Bible
'/is fabulous than the sacrifice I" (mean-
ing the writer of the said libel^ ^ inust
" make to believe it to be, true, that alone
^ would be sufficient to determine my choice."
And in another part of which said libel was
then and there, contained according to the
tenor following that is to say '^ I have now
'' gone throuen the examination of the four
'f books ascribed to Matthew, Mark, Luke»
^ and John " (meaning the Gospels in thai
part of the Holy Bible which is called the
New Testament ascribed to Saint Matthew
Saint Mark Saint Luke and Saint John) *< and
*^ when it is considered that the whole space
** of time from the Crucifixion " (meaning the
crucifixion of our blessed Saviour and R&>
deemer Jesus Christ) " to what is called the
<' Ascension, is but a few days ; apparently
^ not more than three or four : and, that all
'' the circumstances are reported to have hap-
^* pened nearly about the same spot, Jeru-^
*' salem, it is I believe impossible to find
'^ in any story upon record so many and such
*' glaring absurdities, contradictions, and
'< falsehoods, as are in those books" ^meaning
thereby that there are glaring absurdities con-
tradictions and falsehoods m those books)
to the great displeasure of Almighty God to
the great scandal infamy and contempt and
ridicule of the Holy Bible and the Christian
religion io the evil example of all others and
against the peace of our said lord the king hia
crown and aignity.

That the said Thomas Williams being a
wicked impieus and evil disposed person and
having no regard to the laws or religion of this
realm but wickedly blasphemously impiously
and profanely devising and intending to as-
perse vilify and ridicule that part of the Holy
Bible which is called the Old Testament on
the said day and year aforesaid at Westminster
aforesaid m the county aforesaid with force
and arms did publish and cause to be pub-
lished a certain other false wicked and4mpious
and blasphemous libel of and. concerning that
part of the Holy Bible which is called the
Old Testament containing therein among
other things as follows (that is to say) " It"
(meaning that part of tlie Holy Bible which
IS called the Old Testament) '< is a book of

659] S7 GEORGE III. Trial of nomas WUliam/or Blasphemy, [660

't.»^

** lies, wickedaess, and blasphemy." To Xht
great displeasure of Almighty God to the
mat scaodal and iniamy ofthe Holy Bible to
the evil example of all otiters and i^inst th6
peacip of our said lord the king his crowil and
dignity.

That the said Thomtis Williams being a
wicked impions and evil-disposed person and
having no regard to the la^Vs or religion of
this realm but wickedly impiously ana blas-
phemously devising and intending to asperse
vilify discredit and ridicule the ChrisUan reli-
gion on the dajr and year aforesaid at West-
ihinster aforesaid in the county aforesaid with
fbrce and arms did Wickedly impiously and
pronely publish and cause to be published a
certahi otner wicked fklse imnious profane
blasphemous hbel oontainha^ tneretn among
other things as follows that is to say '* AS it
<' ie nothing extraordinary that a #6inan
'* should be with child befok she was married,
<< and that the^efbte she might bring forth,
" should be exeeuted teven unjustly ; I sete no
** reason for not belibvhig thist such a Wcfman
'* as Mary^ (meaning the blessed Viirgin Mary)
** and such a mim as Joseph) and Jesus, ex-
*' isted : their hiere existence is a matter of
** iiidiifierence about which there is no gr6und
^ either to believe or (o disbelieve ; and which
'^ coihes. under the common head ef < It may
^ < be so, and What then/ the probability how-
" ever is, that there were sucn t>ersotts, bt ^t
** least such as resembled them in part ofthe
^ circumstances ; because almost all roinaiitic
** stories have been suggested by some actual
'* circnmstance ; as the adventiues of Robin*
''Crusoe, not a word of which is true, wei^ sue-
** geMedby the ckse of Alexander Selkirk; It
^ M not then theexistence or the non-existence
** of the persons that I trouble myself about :
'' It is the fabie of Jesus Christ, as told in the
" New Testament, and the wild and visiohary
" doctrine njdsed thereon, againM which i
** contend. The story, taking it as it is told, is
*' blasphemously obscene : It dvcs an acbount
** of a young Woman engaged to be married,
** and, while under this engagement, she is,
^ to speak plain langiia^, debauched by a
^ Ghost, under the impious preteniee (Luke
'< chapter the first, verse the S5th) that the
** Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the
** power of the Highest shall over^adow
"thee." To the great displeasure of Ai-
mighty God to the great scandal and infamy
of the Christian religion to the evil example
d[ all others and against the peace of our said
lord the king his crown and dignity.

fhat the said Thomas Williams being a
wicked impious and evil-disptsed person and
having no regard to the laws or religion of this
leahn but wickedly impiously and blas-
phemously devising b,M intending to asperse
vilify and ridicnie the Christian religion on the
day and year aforesaid at Westminster afore-
said in the county aforesaid with force and
arms did wickedly impiously and profanely
publish and cause to be pubhshed a certain

other false wicked impious profane and h)m^
phemous Kbel conMinIng therein amohg other
things as follows that is to say ** What is it
" the TesUment'' (meaning that part of the
Holy Bible which is called the New Testa-
ment) '* teaches us P To believe that the Al-
'* mighty committed debanchety with a wc^-
<' roan engaged to be married ; and the belief
'* of this debauchery is called faith.'' To the'
great displeasure of Almighty God to the
Ireat scandal infamy and contempt of the
Christian religion to the evil Example of all
others and against the peace of our said lord
the king his crown and dignity.

The defendant pleaded the general issue.
Not Guilty, and thereupon issue was joined.

The Indictment was opened by Mr. Bayley.

The Hon. T^lofiras £n^*iie.-^May it please
your Lordship ;— Oentlebien of ^ Jury ; The
charge of blasphemy, whldk is put upon the
record against the publisher ef Ihh publlea-
tion, is not an accusation of th^ servants of
the Crown, but cdme^ before ynu sanctioned
by the oaths of a etand jury of the toutetry. — '
It stood for trial upon a fbtmerday; but it
happening, as it frequently do^, withiout any
imputation upon the gentlemen named in the
pAnel, that a sufficient number did not appMf
tt> constitute a fid! special JU17, I thought if
ihy duty to Withd^w the cause fmm trial, tilt
I bould have the opportunity bf addnessine
liiyselftoyott, who weriB drigittidly ap|idntta
to try it.

I pursued this course, from no- Jehlbtisy of
the common juries appointed by the lairs fbr
the ordinary service of the court, sinc^ my
whole life has been XHtkt continued experitmtfr
of their virtues ; but because I thought it X)t
great importance, that those who were to de-
cide upon a cause bo vtrr momentous to the
Stibllc, should have the highest posuble quk-
fications for the decision; tiiat they should
not only be men, capable, from their eduba*
tions. of forming an enlightened judgment,
but thkt their situations should be sucn as to
bring them withm the full view of their coub*
try, to which, in character and iii estimation,
they were, in their own turns, to be respon-
sible.

Not having the honour, gentlemen, to be
sworn for the king as one of his counsel, it
has fallen much oftener to my lot to defend
indictments for libels, than to assist in the
prosecution of them ; but I feel no embarrass*
ment from ti)at recollection. — I shall not be
found to-day to express a sentiment, or to ut-
ter an expression, inconsistent with those in-
valuable principles for which I have uniformly
contended in the defence of others. Nothing
that I have ever said, either professionally or
personally, for the liberty of the press, do t
mean to-day to contradict or counteract. On
the contrary, I desire to preface the very short
discourse I have to make to you, with te-
mhiJing-yon, that it is your most solcmYi'

esi]

M fuUisking the << Age ofReaton.**

A. D. 1797.

[66«

Ailj to Uke qune that it sdKrs ao injury in
your hands. A free and unlicensed press, in
the jud end legal tense of the expretiiouj has
led to all the blessings both of religion and
government, which Great Britain or any part
of the world at this moment enjoys; and it is
calculated tg advance mankind to still higher
degrees of civilization and happiness. But this
fceedon, like every others must be limited to
be enjoyed, and, like every human advantage,
may be defeated by iu abuse.

Gentlemen, the defendant stands indicted
for having published this book, which I have
only read from the obligations of professional
dutVy and from the roadiha of which I rose
with astonishment and disgust. Standing
here with all the privileges bebnging to the
hiehett counsel for the Crown, I shall be en-
titled to reply to anjr defence that shall be
made for the nublieatioo. I shall wait whb
patienoe till I near it

Indeed, if I were to anticipate the defence
which I hear and read of, it would be de&ming
hf anticipation the learned counsel who is
to make it ; since, if I am to collect it, from a
formal notice given to the prosecutors in the
oourse of tho proceedings, I have to expect,
that) instead of a defence eomlncted accord-
ing to the rules and nrinciples of Bnglish law,
the fbimdation of all our laws, and the sanc-
tion of til justice, are to be struck at and in-
sulted.— What gives the Court its jurisdiction ?
What but the oath which his lordship, as well
as yourselves^ have sworn upon the Gospel to
fiilftl? Yet in the king^s Court, where his
majesty is himself also sworn to adooinister
the justice of England — in the king's Court —
who receives his high authorit}r under a so-
leoHi oath to maintahn the Christian religion,
es it is promulgated by God in the Holy Scrip-
tures, I am nevertheless called upon, as coun-
ael for the prosecution, to ** proauee a certain
hookf described in the indictment to he trg
HOLY BrBLB.'^ No man deserves to be upon
the rolls, who has dared, as an attorney, to
put his name to such a notice. It is an insult
to the authority and dienity of the Court of
which he is an officer; unce it calls in ques-
tion the very ibundationsof its jurisdiction. —
If this is to be the spirit and temper of the
defence; if, as I collect from that array of
* f>ooks which are u>read upon the benches be-
- hind me, this puolication is to be vindicated
.i>y an attack of 8H the truths which the Chris-
-tmn religion promulgates to mankind, let it
tie remembered, that such an argument was
neither suggested nor justified of any thing
eafid by me on the part of the proiiecution.

In His stage of the proceedings^ I shsAl call
4ot revefcnee to the sacred Scriptures, not from
•their merits, unbounded as tfac^ are, .but from
•their mttherity In a Christian country— not
from ^e oblieatious of coosclence, but from
•tlie rules ot uiw. For ray own part, gentle-
«ien, I have been ever deeply devoted to the
4rtitlisof Christianity ; and my firm belief in the
<lMly Gospel ia by -no memh o««ig.to the pre-

judices of education (though I was religiously
educated by the best of parents), but has
arisen from the fullest and most continued
reflexions of my riper years and understand-
ing. It forms at tliis moment the great con-
sotation of a life, which, as a shadow^ passes
away; and without it, I should consider my
lone course of he^th and prosperitv (too long,
perhaps, and loo uninterruptea to be good for
any man) only as the dust whkb the wind
scatters, and rather as a snare than as a bless-
hiff.

Modi, however, as I wish to support the
authority of Scripture from a reasoned consi-
deration of it, I shall repress that subject for
the present; but if the aefence, as I have sus-
pected, shall bring them at all into argument
or question, I must then fulfil a duty which I
owe, not only to the Court, as counsel for
the prosecutbn, but to the public, and to the
world — to state what I foel and know con-
cerning the evidences of that religion, which
is denied without being examined, and reviled
without being understood.

I am well aware that, by the communica-
tions of a vasR PRBSS, vH the errors of man-
kind, from age to age, have been dissipated
and dispeilecl; and I 'recollect that the world,
under the banners of reformed^hristianity,
has struggled through persectrtion to the
noble eminence on which it stands at this
moment, shedding the blessincs of humanity
and science upon the nations of the earth.

It may be asked then, by what means the
Reformation would have been effected, if the
books of the reformers had been suppressed,
and the errors of now exploded superstitions
had been supported by the terrors of an un-
reformed state? or liow, upon such princi-
ples, any reformation, civil or reli^ous, can
m future be eflected f The solution is easy : —
Let us examine what are the genuine princi-
ples of the liberty of the press, as they regard
writings upon general subjects, unconnected
with the personal reputations of private men,
which are wholly foreign to the present in-
quiry. They are full of simplicity, and are
broueht as near perfection^ hy the law of
England, as, perhaps, is attainable t>y any of
the hrail institutions of mankind.

Although everv community must establish
supreme authorities, founded upon fixed prin-
ciples, and must give high powers to magis-
trates to administer laws' for the pivservation
of government, and for the security of those
who are to be protected bv it; — ^yet, as infal-
hbility and perfection belong neither to hu-
man individuals nor to human establishments,
it oii|ht to be the policy of all free nations,
as .it IS most peculiarly i|M principle of pur
own, to permit the most unbounded freedom
of discussion, even to the detection of errors
in the constitution of the very government itr
self; so as that common deeoram is observed,
which every state must exact from its sul>*
jects, and which imposes no restraint upon
any intellectual composition^ iasriy, honestly,

663J 37 GEORGE III. THal of Thomas Wdlidmt/or Blasphemy, [664

and decentl^y addrewed to the coDBciences and
underetaadings of men. Upon this principle,
I have an unquestionable right — a right which
the best subjects have exercised — to examine
the principles and structure of the constitu-
tion, and by fieur, manly reasoning, to ones-
lion the practice of its aclministrators. I nave
a right to consider and to point out errors in
the one or in the other; and not merely to
reason upon their existence, but to consider
the means of their reformation.

By such free, well-intentioned, modest,
^nd dignified communication of sentiments
and opinions, all nations have been gradually
improved, and milder laws and purer religions
have been established. The same principles,
which vindicate civil controversies, honestly
directed, extend their protection to the
sharpest contentions on tne subject of reli*
gious faiths. This rational and legal course
of improvement was recognised and ratified
by lord Kenyon as the law of England, in a
late trial at Guildhall,* where he looked back
with gratitude to the labours of the reformers,
as the fountains of our religicMs emancipation,
and of the civil blessings that followed in their
train.—The English constitution, indeed, does
not stop short u the toleration of reli^ous
ytinionSf but liberally extends it to prAcUce, —
It permits every man, even publicly, to
worship God according to his own conscience,
though in marked dissent from the national
establishment, — so as he professes the general
faith, which is the sanction of all our moral
duties, and the only pledge of our submission
to the system which constitutes the state.

Is not this freedom of controversy, and
freedom of worship, sufficient for all the pur-
poses of human happiness and improvement?
•—Can it be necessarv for either, that the law
ahould hold out indemnity to those, who
wholly abjure and revile the government of
their country, or the religion on which it
rests for its foundation ? I expect to hear, in
answer to what I am now saying, much that
will offend me. — My learned friend, from the
difficulties of his situation, which I know,
from experience, how to feel for very sin-
cerely, may be driven to advance propositions
to which it may be my duty, with much
freedom, to reply; — and the law will sanction
that freedom. — But will not the ends of jus-
tice be completely answered by my exercise of
that right, in terms that are decent, and calcu-
lated to expose its defects? — Or will my arsu-
xnent suffer, or will public justice be impe£d,
because neither private honour and justice,
nor public decorum, would endure my telling
my very learned friend, because I diner from
him in opinion, that he is a fool, — a liar, — and
a scoundrel, in the face of the Court ? This is
just the distinction between a book of free
ieg^ controversy^ and the book which I am
arraigning befone you. Every man has a

* See lord Kenyon's summing up in Mr.
Bfieves's c^se^p. &91, of this'voluae.

right to investigate, with decency, controver-
sial pointo of the Christian religion ; — but no
man, consistently with a law which only
exists under its sanctions, has a right to deny
its very existence, and to pour forth such
shocking and insulting invectives, as the
lowest establishments m the gradations of
civil authority ought not to be subjected to,
and which soon would be borne down by in-
solence and disobedience, if they were.

The same principle pervades the whole
system of the law, not merely in its abstract
theory, but in its daily and most applauded
practice. — The intercourse between the sexes,
which, properly regulated, not only continues,
but humanizes and adorns our natures, is the
foundation of all the thousand romances,
plays, and novels, which are in the hands of
every body.— Some of them lead to the confir-
mation of every, virtuous principle ; others,
though with the same profession, address th;e
imagination in a manner to lead the passions
into dangerous excesses ; but though the law
does not nicely discriminate the various
shades which distinguish such works from
one another, so as to suffer many to pass,
through its liberal spirit, that upon principle
ought to be suppressed, would it, or does it
tolerate, or does any decent man contend tluit
it ought to pass by unpunished, libels of the
most shameless obscenity, manifestly pointed
to debauch innocence, and to blast and poison
the morals of the rising generation? This is
only another illustration to demonstrate the
obvious distinction between the work of an
author, who fairly exercises the powers of his
mind, in investigating the religion or govern-
ment of any country, and him who attacks
the rational existence of every religion or go-
vernment, and brands with absurdity and (oily
the state which sanctions, and tho obedient
tools who cherish the delusion. But this
publication appears to me to be as cruel and
mischievous in its effects, as it is manifestly
illegal in its principles ; because it strikes at
the^st— sometimes, akis! the only refuge
and consolation amidst the distresses and
afflictions of the world . The poor and humble,
whom it affects to pity, may be Stabbed to tne
heart by it. — ^They have more occasion for
firm hopes beyond the grave, than the rich
and prosperous, who have other comforts to
render life delightful. — I can conceive a dis-
tressed but virtuous man, surrounded by his
children, looking up to him for bread when
he has none to give them ; sinking under the
last day's labour, and un^al to ue next, —
yet still, supported by confidence in the hour
when all tears shall be wiped from the eyes
of affiiction, bearing the burden laid upon him
by a mysterious Providence which he adores,
and anticipatinjg with exultation the revealed
promises of his Creaior, when be shall be
greater tjian the greatest, and happier thaa
the happiest of mankind. What a change. in
such a mind might be wrought by such a
merciless publicaUon irrGeAtlemen I wbctbor

€66]

in puhUshing the << Age tfRmkn:'

A. D. 1797.

[666

th«8e remarks are the over-charged dedam^
tioDs of an accusing counsel, or the just re-
flexions of a roan aniious for the public hap-
piness, which is best secured by the morals of
a nation, wiJl be soon settled by an appeal to
the passages in the work, Uiat are selected by
the indictment for your consideration and
judgment. You are at liberty to connect them
with every context and sequel, and to bestow
upon them the mildest interpretation.

[Here Mr. Erskine read and commented
upon several of the selected passages,
and then proceeded as follows :3

Gentlemen, it would be useless and dis-
gusting to enumerate the other passages
within the scope of the indictment. — How
any man can rationally vindicate the publica-
tion of such a book, m a country where the
Christian religion is the very foundation of the
law of the land, I am totally at a loss to con-
ceive, and have no ideas for the discussion of.
— How is a tribunal, whose whole jurisdiction
is founded upon the solemn belief and practice
of what is here denied as falsehood, and re-
probated as impietv, to deal with such an
anomalous defence f*-Upon what principle is
it even offered to the Court, whose authority
is contemned and mocked at ? — If the religion
proposed to be called in question, is not pre-
viously adopted in belief and solemnly acted
upon, what authority has the Court to pass
any judgment at all of acquittal or condemna-
tion ? — ^why am £ now^ or upon any other oc-
casion, to submit to his lordship's authority ?
<^Why am I now, or at any time, to address
twelve of my equds, as I am now addressing
you, with reverence and submission P — Under
what sanation are the witnesses to give their
evidence, without which there can be no
trial? — Under what obligations can I call
upon you, the jury representing your country,
to administer justice ? — Surely upon no other
than that you are swoun to adhi mister it

VKD£R THE OATBS YOU HAVE TAKEN. — ^The

whole jodicial fabric, from the king's sove-
reign authority to the lowest office of magis-
tracy, has no other tbundation. — ^The who& is
built, both in form and substance, upon the
same oath of every one of its ministers to do
justice, AS God shall help theii hebeaftee.
What God? And what here4pter? That
God, undoubtedly, who has commanded kings
to rule, and judges to decree justice; — ^wEo
has said to witnesses, not only by the voice
of nature, but in revealed commandments—

thou SHALT hot BEAR FALSE TESTIMONY

AeAiNST THY heiohbour; and' who has en-
forced obedience to them by the revelation of
the unutterable blesunes which shall attend
their observance, and £e awful ptmishments
which shfdl await upon their transgression.

But it seems this is an age op reason, and

the time and tlie person are at last arrived,

that are to dissipate the errors which have

.4>verspread the past generations of ignorance.

— Xhe>bdiiever9 in Christianity are maoy, but

it bdongs to the few that are wise to correct
their credulity.— Belief is an act of reason,
and superior reason may, therefore, dictate to
the weak. In running the mind over the
long list of sincere and devout Christians, I
(^nnot help lamenting, that Newton had not
lived to this day, to have had his shallowness
filled up with this new flood of light. — But
the subject is too awful for irony. — ^I will
speak plainly and directly. Newton was a
Christian ! — ^Newtonv whose mind hurst forth
from the fetters fastened by nature upon our
finite conceptions; — ^Newton, whose science
was truth, and the foundation of whose know-
ledfi^ of it was philosophy— not those visionary
ana arrogant presumptions, which too often
usui^p its name, but philosophy restioe upon
the basis of mathematics, which, like figures,
cannot lie; — Newton, who carried the line
and rule to the uttermost barriers of creation,
and explored the principles by which all
created matter exists, and is held together.
But this extraordinary man, in the mighty
reach of his mind, overlooked, perhaps, the
errors, which a minuter investigation of the
created things on this earth mi^ht have
taught him. — What shall then be said of the
great Mr. Boyle, who looked into the orjganic
structure of all matter, even to the inanimate
substances which the foot treads upon? —
Such a man may be supposed to have been
equally qualified with Mr. Paine to look up
through nature to nature's God ; yet the ttr
suit of all hi$ contemplations was, the most
confirmed and devout belief in all which this
other holds in contempt, as despicable and
drivelling superstition. — But this error mi^ht,
perhaps, arise from a want of due attention
to the foundations of human judgment, and
tlie structure of that understanding which
God. has given us for the investigation of
truth. — Let that Question be answered by Mr.
Locke, who, to tne highest pitch of devotion
and adoration, was a Christian— Mr. Locke,
whose office was, to detect the errors of think-
i^& by going up to the very fountains of
thought, and to direct into the proper track of
reasoning, the devious mind of man, by show-
ing him Its whole process, from the first per-
ceptions of sense to the last conclusions of ra-
tiocination;— putting a rein upon false opi-
nion, by practical rules for the conduct of
human judgment.

But these men, it may be ssud, were only
deep thinkers, and lived in their closets, unac-
custoiped to the traffic of the world, and to the
laws which practically regulate mankind.
Gentlemen ! jn the place where we now sit
to administer the justice of this great country,
the never-to-be-foreocten sir Matthew Hale
presided; — ^whose nith in Christianity is an
exalted commentary upon its truth and reason,
and whose life was a glorious example of its
fruits; — whose justice, drawn from the pure
fountain of the Christian dispensation, will
be, in all ages, a subject of the highest reve-
rence and Mmiration. But it is said by the

667] 37 GSORQE HI. Trial of Thomas WdSamfor Ebupliemy, [668

author, tba the ChiistMHi fable is but the
tale of the more ancient MiperstHioDS of the
world, and may he easily detectecl by a proper
underalanding of the mythologie6 of the
Heattois.*-l>id MHtioiiuadcrslanNl those my-
tbologiefi? — ^Was bb leas versed thaa Mr.
PaiBfi in Ibe iiiperstttions of the ^vorld ? ne,-^
ibey were the attb}ect of his imtnorUii soog;
and thotigh shut uut from all rocttrreDce to
iheoty he poured ^e« iorth from the stores of
1^ memory nob with all that man ever knew,
•ad bud them in their order as the illustration
of real and exalted faith, the unquestionable
aoMcce of that fervid genius, whioh has cast a
kind of shade upon most of the other works
of man—

fie psBi'd Iht flammg bouiids of pliios and tune :
The liviog Ibrooe, the Mpphire Uaae,
Wkese angels trsmUe while they gaze.
He WW,— 4ai, blasted with aicess of lights
Glos*4 bh eyas ia endkfls night.

But It was theKghtof the body only that was
extinguished : ^ The celestial ti get shone
inward, and enabled him to justify the ways
i>f God to flMm.*—- The result of hu thinking
was nevertheless not quite the same as the
author's before us. The mysterious incarna-
tion of our blessed saviour (which this work
Masphemes In words so wholly unfit for the
mofQth of a christian, or for the ear of a court
of justice, that I dare not, and will not, give
them utterance) Milton made the grand con-
clusion of his Paradise Lottf the rest from his
finished labours, and the ultimate hope, ex-
pectation and glory of the world.

X Virg^ is bis mother, but his sire,
Tlie power of the most high ;— he shall ascend
^e throne here^tary, and bound his reign
"With easth^ wkie bounds, lus glory with the
besipeiis.

The immortal poet having thus put into
the mouth of the an^cl the prophecy of man's
r^emption, follows it with that solemn and
beautUul admonition, addressed in the poem
to our great first parent, but intended as an
address to his posterity through all genera-
tions:

Thishavhig lem'dy thou, hast attain'd the sum
Of wisdom ; hope no higher, though all the stars
Thou kntew*Btby name, and all th' ethereal power%

..All secrets of the deep, all nature's works.
Or works of tSod in heaven, air, earth, or sea.
And all the riches of this world enjoy'st,
And SH the rule, one empire ; only add
DeeAi to thy knowledge answerable, add faith.
Add Tirtae, patience, temperanee, add love,
By aane to come call'd oharity, the soul
Of an thereat: then vrilt thou not be. loth

. To kave iMs pamdiae, but shaH possess
A paradise within^hee, Juippiar fiir.

Thus you find all thatisgveator w>e,.or
splendiil, or illustrious, anioogstcreated beings ;
— all the minds gifled beyond ordinary nature,
if not inspired l^ its universal Author for the
advancement and dignity of the world, though
drrkled by distant ages, and by olashing opi-
-nioips, yet joaing ^. it ware in one suElime

chorus, to colabrate the truths of Cbristianfty ;
lining upon its holy altars the never* fading
offerings of their immortal wisdjom.

Against all this concurring testimonv, we
find suddenlv, from the autliorof this ixiok,
that the Bible teaches nothing but ** lies,
OBscEiiiTT, cauELTY, and rNJUSTicE.'' Had
he ever read our Saviour's sermon on the
Mount, in which the great principles of our
faith and duty are summed up? — ^Let us all
but read and practise it ; and lies, obscenity,
cruelty and injustice, and all human wicked-
ness, will be banished from the world !

Gentlemen, there is but one consideration
more, which i cannot possibly omit, because
I confess it affects me very deeply.— T^
author of this book has written larsely on'
public liberty and government ; and Uiis last

Krfbrmance, whi«i I am now prosecuting,
s, on that account, been more widely cir-
culated, and principally among those who
attached themselves from principle to his for-
mer works.«-This circunastance renders a
public attack upon ail reweaiod religion from
mck m writer infinitely more dangecous. Tho
religious and moral sense of tM fieople of
Great Brijtain is the ffreat anchor, whkb alone
csa hold the vessel of the stale amkbl the
atorass which agitate the wocki ? and if the
Bass«f the people wcm debauched from the
princifilef of eett^n ; — the true basis of that
bumanity, ohanly, and benevolence, which
have been so long ^ national characteristic ;
instead of mixing mysdf, as I sometimes
have done, bs fKilitual reformations, I would
retire to the uttermost cornem of the earth, to
ttvoid tlicir agitation; and would bear, not
ooij the imferleotions and abuses complained
of in our own wise establishmenl| but even
the worst govemmeut that ever existed in the
world, rather than go to the work of reforma-
tion wibh a midtitude sot free from all the
charities of GhfisUanity, who had no other
sense of God's existence, than was to be col-
leeted from Mr. Paine*s observation of natare,
which the mass of mankind have no leisure to
contemplate ; which p^mises no future re-
wards to animate the good in the glorious
pursuit of human happiness, nor punishments
lo deter the wkked from destroying it even
in its birth. -^The people of England are a re-
ligious pcofde, and, wrth the blessing of God,
so far as it is %i my power, I will lend my aid
to keep them so.

i have no objections lo the most extended
and ftee discussions upon doctrinal points of
ttie christian religion ; and though the lam rf
England does not permit ir, i do not dread tlie
veaeoalbp of £)e«ets against the existence of
Chttstianity itself, because, as was said bv
its divine Author, if it be of God it will stand.
An iutellectiial book, however erroneous, ad-
dressed to the intellecUial world upon so pro-
fotmd and complicated a subject, can never
work tbe imscbief whioh this hwictment is
caicttliitcd lo repress. — Such works will only
•incite the mitids of men enlightened by study

66D]

in publishing the " Age qfRcQMn**

A. D. 1797.

[670

to ft closer investigation of a subject well
worthy of their deepest and continued con-
templation.—Tlic powers of the mind arc
given for human improvement in the progress
of human existence. — ^The changes produced
by such reciprocations of lights and intelli-
gences arc certain in their progression, and
make their way imperceptibly, by the final
and irresistible power of truth. —If Christi-
anity be founded in falsehood, let us become
deists in this manner, and I am contented. —
But this book has no such object, and no such
«apacity : — it presents no arguments to the
wise and enlightened; on the contrary, it
treats the faitn and opinions of the wisest
with the most shocking contempt, and stirs
up men, without the advantages of learning,
or sober thinking, to a total disbelief of every
thing hitherto held sacred ; and conse()uentIy
to a rejection of all the laws and ordinances
of the state, which stand only upon the as-
sumption of their truth.

Gentlemen, I cannot conclude without ex-
pressing the deepest tegret at all attacks upon
the chnstian rengion by authors who profess
to promote the civil liberties of the world. —
For tmder what other auspices than Chris-
tianity have the lost and subverted liberties
of mankind in former ages been re-asserted ?
—-By what zeal, but the warm zeal of devout
christians, have English liberties been re-
deemed and consecrated ? — Under what other
sanctions, even in our own days, have liberty
and hftppffness been spreading to the utter-
most corners of the earth ?— What work of
civilization, what commonwealth of greatness,
has this bald religion of nature ever estab-
lished f-^yft see, on the contrary, tiie nations
that have no other light than that of nature
to direct them, sunk m batbarism, or slaves
to.arbitrat^ gc^remmeuts ; whilst under the
christian dispensation, the great c&lreer'of the
world has been slowly, but clearly advancing,
— lighter at every step, frcm the encouraging
prophecies of the gospel, and leading, I trust,
in the end, to tmrversal ant! eternal happiness.
Each generation of Mankind can 'see but a
few revoking links of this mighty and mys-
terions chain; but by doing our several
duties in onr allotted stations, we are sure
that we are fulfilling the purposes of our
existence. — You, I trust, will fulfil touas this
day.

EviDfiXCB FOE TBI PaOSECUTION.

Curtit Auguiiui Fkmng swom.-^Ex«mined
by Mr. Oatrom,

T believe, Mr. Fleming, you are now one
of the clerks in the Bank of England f — Yes,
I km.

At the time when the transaction took
place, about which I am going to examine
you, ^ou were clerk to Mr. Smythc, solicitor
for this prosecution f — I was.

Did you at anv time and whtn, sir, go to
the shop of the defendant Thomas Williams.?
—Yes, I did,

Wlicn was it f— It was the Tth Df Fcbni«y.
1797.

Was it the 7th or irth ?— The 7th.

Where is that shop situate? — In little
Turnsnie, Holborn.

1 ask you first, a little out of order, before
you went away, did you see the defendant
himself? — I did.

Now when you first went In whom did yon
find in the shop, and what passed ? — t ibund
a woman in the shop, and I asked her for the
book,*' The Age of Reason f* she told me she
would call Mr. Williams down stairs; she
did not know she had any of them bound
up : she called him down, and he came. I
asked for that book, and Mr. Williams gave
me this.

In what shape was it when he first pro-
duced it? — It was not then sewed together,
and not in sheets.

How not in sheets: was it folded ?-^Yes, it
was.

But not stitched ? — ^No.

Did he give any directions fX^Mi the book
before it was delivered to you ? — ^To the
woman in the shop : he desired her to stitch
it together.

Did you pay for it : — I did.

What sum did you pay for it? —One shil-
ling. •

Did he deliver it to you, or the woman m
his presence ?— He delivered it to me.

Is that the identical book that you pur-
dhased of him in the manner it is stated } — It
is. I marked it : my name is on it : I wrote
the day of the month the same day.

[Delivered it in.]

[Here Mr. lautcH read aome of the passages
- ^ la tbe indictnent.]

Mr. G^rrow, — My lord, I natty think
might spare tbe Court and hjuty thfr pais
of uearin^ this read.
I Lord Kenypn. — To me, who an a i^risttan,
to be sure it is sbockii^ perfectly skodciag !

Mr. GatTov. — We certainly will not read
tlMs>^a89age, for it is impossible to look at it,
in private^ without horror.

Bobert Smytke, mwnu

Look at that.^ You were served with that
notice? — Yes, sir, I was.

Mr. Gamm — Put it in, Mr. Smythe.

Lord Kenyan, — Who served you with ill-—
A clerk of Mr. Martin's.

[Read.]

In the Rlng^s- bench

The King against Thomas WiUiama
for Blasphemy.

Take notice that the prosecutors of ttie in-
dictment against the above-named defendant-
will upoR the trial of this cause be required

67i] 37 GEORGE III. Trial of Thmas mUiamsfar Bh^hmj^, [672

of the present prosecution, nor tlie ans«ver of
the same learned prelate to the fifteenth and
sixteenth chapters of Mr. Glbbon^s Koniau
History.

Gentlemen, I wish it to be distinctly under-
stood, that I do not appear here to day in the
character of a theological disputant, whose
object it might be to maintain the truth of
one system of religious tenets, or to arraign
the falsehood of another : that 1 do not pre-
sent myself before you as a deist, prepared to
deny the truth of revealed religion ; to im-
peach the authority of the Bible, or to justify,
m the strict sense of the word, the attack
made upon it by the publication which is the
object of the present pfosecution : but, that I
stand here, an advocate in an En^ish court
of justice, to assert and to. maintain, what I
shall ever confidently and proudly maintain,
the right of every individual, fairly and ho-
nestly to discuss a subject confessedly of the
first importance to mankind^ and to publish
to the world the result of his enquiries thus
honestly and fairly made ; whether that re-
sult be right or wrong; in favour. of the pre-
vailing system, or against it.

Gentlemen, in all prosecutions for libel the
charge against tlie aefendant consists of two
component parts ; the fact of writing, print*
ing, or publishing, and the intention with
which he writes, prints, or publishes; the
fact is always the object of testimony ; the ia-
terUion too may sometimet be the object of tes-
timony, and may be collected .from circum-
stances and facts extrinsic to the work which
is the object of prosecution ; but it is gene-
rally to be collected from the tenor and sub-
stance of the work itself. The mere fact of
publication is, in itself, no crime ; if it were
the defendant might as well be found guilty
of publishing a liwtl of any description which
lerad ineenuity might susgest— for bavins
puDlishea the Bible, as for naving published
the*' Age of Reason.'' But, whatever may
formerly have been held to be the law on this
subject, we owe it to the £reat talents and un-
wearied exertions of my learned friend who
conducts the present nrosecution, that it is
now happily establishea that from the mere
fact of pubucation a jury are not to convict :
they are to look, not only to the nature of the
publication, its composition and its spirit, but
to the intention of the defendant ; whether he
be the author or publisher ; and from their
opinion of the mora/ guilt or innocence of that
intent ion f to convict or to acquit In the prcs
sent case, the fact of publication is proved ;
the only object, therefore, of every address to
you, is the guilt or innocence of the inten-
tion.

Gentlemen, in most prosecutions for libel
the language in which the defendants inten-
tion is cnarged, in the instrument of accusa-
tion, is plain and intelligible to common un-
derstandings ; incapable of admitting differ-
ent minings, accordmg to the different prin-
ciples of the persons who read it. This ob-

to produce a certain book described in the
saia indictment to be the Holy Bible.
Dated the inh day of June, 1797«

JoHK Martin,*
Solictor for the defendant.
To Messieurs Grave and Vines,
Agents for the Prosecutors.''

Lord Kenyan, — Is the solicitor for the de-
fendant in court ? Does he avow that notice ?

Mr. Martin. — I certainly, sir, cannot deny
it.

Mr. Ersftine.— That is our case my lord.

Defence.

Mr. Stewart Kyd^ — Gentlemen of the Jury >
The charee against the defendant is, no doubts
as the learned counsel who conducts the
prosecution has stated it to be, a serious and
important one. Serious and important as it
is, the defendant has entrusted to roe the duty
of defending him against it ; a duty which
while I endeavour to discharge, with full at-
tention to the respect that is due to the dig-
nity of this Court, and with that decent and
unaffected seriousness which I feel belongs to
the subject, I have no doubt I shall be fa-
voured with a patient and impartial hearing,
both from his lordship and from you.

Gentlemen, though I have undertaken to
defend this man from the penal cmisequences
which it is sought to attach to the publica-
tion of the pamphlets which contain the pas-
sages you nave heard read; and thoujgn I
bow avow that in my conscience I think my
defence of him ought to be attended with suc-
cess, ye\ I think it proper, in this early period
of my address to you, and indeed Mr. Erskine
has m effect called upon me to apprize you,
that it is not of course that I should have
undertaken to maintain the truth of every
assertion contained in those passi^ges, or to
assert the correctness of the reasoninj^ or the
justness of every conclusion drawn from the
&cts idleged, or the arguments stated in the
publication. On such a plan I believe it
"would be impossible to defend any book that
was ever written, on the sulijects of religion,
or politics, metaphysics,, or morals; or on
any subject which in its nature is not suscep-
tible of strict and . absolute demonstration.
On such a plan I would not, speaking for
myself, undertake to defend even the excel-
lent answer of the bishop of Landaff, to part
of the very publication which is the subject

* This man had been imprisoned for several
months in the years 1794 and 1795, under a
charge of high treason. He had been tried
for a libel by a special jury and acquitted, and
had .been committed by the court of King's-
bench into the custody of the marshal in
consequence of his misconduct in a case in
which'4te acted as an attorney. He published
some particulars relating to these different
transactions, in a pamphlet intituled ''An Ac-
count of the Proceedings on a charge of High
Treason against John Martin.*' London^ 1795.

673]

in pubUshing the " Age ofReaion.**

A. D. 1797.

[674

tervation is far from being applicable to ihe
present case, as you will see from an exami-
nation of the terms ; they are these : — ** bias-
phemously, impiouslyyand profanely." — Gen-
tlemen, I would on no occasion choose to oc-
cupy your time by an ostentatious and useless
display of learning ; much less \*ouId I at-
tempt it on an occasion so serious, and so so-
lemn as the present I ho^e, therefore, no
such intention will be imputed to me, from
my endeavouring to fix the exact and origi-
nal meaning of these terms. I feel it neces-
sary to the full performance of my duty to
my client. '^ Blasphemously** is denved mm
two Greek words, which signify, " to hurt, to
injure, or to wound, the fame, character, lepu-
tation, or good opinion ;" — " blasphemously,"
therefore, means "with an intention to hurt,
to injure, or to wound, the fame, character,
reputation or good opinion." ** Profanel;^"
is derived more immediately from a Latm
.word which signifies *' a sacred place, a place
^et apart for the local worship of some divi-
nity; a place where the favoured votaries may
be received to a more immediate communica-
tion wHh the object of their adoration : in the
language of ancient legends a fane J* " Pro-
Jane," when applied to place, comprehends
all that is not thus considered as holy ground :
when applied to men it is considered as a
term of reproach ; implying that they are un-
worthy to approach the sacred spot; unwor-
thy to have communication v^ith the favoured
votaries :— to do any thing *' profanely,"

•therefore, is to do it '' in a manner, or with'an
intention to offend that which is esteemed
holy;" or, as all subordinate divinities are
now banished from hence, " in a manner, or
with an intention to offend the one supreme
God." " Impiously" is derived from the La-
tin wordpttts, whicn expresses the attachment
affection, respect, or reverence which is due
from man to some other being to whom he
stands in the relation of an inferior; as be-
tween a son and a father, it expresses filial af-
fection ; as between a man and the Deity, it
expresses the constant and habitual reve-
rence due from the former to the latter ; to
do any thing "impiously," therefore, is to do
it " in a manner, or with an intention incon-
sistent with that reverence which is due from
a man to his Creator.'^

It is plain, therefore, that according to the
different systems of religious opinions which
men embrace, they will apply tiie epithets of
blasphemous, impious and profane, recipro-
cally to each other, and frequently, I will ven-
ture to say, with equal justice.

• I will now crave your indulgence while I
illustrate these observations, by examples
from ancient history. The ancient Persians,
who acknowledged only one supreme invisi-
ble God, worshipped the fire and the sun, in-
deed, as his emblems or representatives ; but
they thought it impious to confine the Deity,

. one of whose attributes was omnipresence, to

. one particular place, and. therefore, they had
•VOL. XXVI,

no temples. Cambyses, when he invaded
S^Pty destroyed the temples which he fuund
dedicated to the worship of the sacred ani-
mals, and reproached the Egyptians as impi<-
ous and profane, for worshipping a bull, a cat,
or an onion; the Egyptians, on the other
hand, reproached him^ in the same terms, fur
violating the objects of their religious adora-
tion, when Xerxes invaded Greece, pursu-
ing in like manner the spirit of his own re-
ligion, he destroyed the Grecian temples, and
reproached the Greeks with impiety and pro-
faneness, in pretending to connne the Deity
to a local habitation. The Greeks, on the
contrary, reproached him as impious and pro-
fane, for destroying their temples ; the indig-
nation which they felt from tnis cause, con-
tributed, perhaps, more than any other to pro-
duce those wonderful efforts in defence of
their country, which adorn the pages of th^
historian of that day. A Christian might call
a Turk blasphemous, impious and profane,
for maintaining the divine mission of Mo-
hammed; and ascribing his actions to the im-
mediate influence of God. The T«rk would
speak of the Christian in the same terms, for
denying that mission, disputins; the divine au-
thority of the Koran, and ridiculing and re-
viling its doctrines. The promoters of the
present prosecution assume it as a first prin*
ciple, which must not be controverted or dis-
cussed, that the Bible was written under the
immediate direction or authority of the Deity,
and that it contains the special revelation of
his will to mankind. They will, therefore,
justly, according to that assumed principle^
orand with the epithets of blasphemous, im-
pious, and profane, the roan who shall doubt
the authenticity of the Bible, deny that it con-
tains the word of God, or speak of it in a dis-
respectful or irreverent manner. On the
other hand, the author of the work now under
prosecution, and others of similar opinions,
assumine the right of exercising their reason
on all subjects, claiming to be the arbiters of
their own faith, and having formed their own
ideas of the justice, benevolence, and other
attributes of God, from the uncontrolled exer-
cise of that reason in the contemplation of
his works, assert the richt of examining by
the standiEird of those ideas, any book that is
presented to them as containing the oracles
of God, and having been written under his
immediate inspiration. If, therefore, they
think, they find any thing in this book which
attributes to the Deity things inconsistent
with their preconceived ideas of his dignity,
they will call those blasphemous, impious
and profane, who shall assert this book to be
the word of God, and that the actions related
in it were done by his immediate direction.
I think, therefore, gentlemen, I have deli-
vered m'^self from the necessity of showing
that the intention was not blasphemous, ioi-
pious or profane.

The r^ question is not, whether you or
his lordship approve the book ? Not whether

« X

875] 57 GEORGE III. Trial of Thomas Williamifkr BUuphttdy, £678

you oondemn the passaces selected from it,
and inserted in thh inaictment, or any part
of it? Not whether you are of the same opi-
nion with the author ; but whether at the time
fDhen he wrote the book he felt a$ he wrote, and
expressed himself as he felt f Whether he

MEANT SERIOftSLY TO EXAMINE AN IMPORTANT
SUBJECT AND TO SUBMIT HIS THOUGHTS ON IT TO
THE WORLD, WITHOUT A WANTON AND MALEVO-
LENT INTENTION TO DO MISCHIEF ? If this WaS

his object, and I think it is impossible to prove
the contrary, I have the respectable autho-
rity of the bishop of^LandafF for saying that
the author ought not, and of course the pub-
lisher ought not to be amenable to a human
tribunal. I have his authority for saying
more ; I have his authority for saying that it
•is not for any human tribunal to sit m judg-
ment on the tft(en/ion with which a man
writes or publishes what he writes, on such
such subjects. In his Answer to the " Age
of Reason,** page 10, the bishop expresses
himself thus :— " If you have made tne best
" examination you can, and yet reject revealed
*' religion as an imposture, I pray that God may
*' paraon what J esteem your error.'* You ob-
serve, gentlemen, this learned and candid bi-
shop does not take upon himself to condemn
as absolutely and certainly false, the conclu-
sions drawn by the author of this work ; he
supposes it possible that they may be just;
he expresses with becoming modesty, his
opinion that they are erroneous, but he leaves
It to the Author of all truth to pardon the au-
thor, if they be. He continues thus : " And
'' whether you have made this examination or
'' not, does not become m^oran^ man to deter-
*' mine." In another work of the same learned
^relate, I mean his Answer to Mr. Gibbon,
be avows the same liberal sentiments; he in-
troduces himself to Mr. Gibbon in Uiese
words;—" It would give me much uneasi-
" ness to be reputed an enemy to free inquiry
" in religious matters, or as capable of being
** animated into aqy degree of personal male vo-
'''lence, against those who dificr from me in
** opinion. On the contrary, I look upon the
** right of private judgment, in every concern
'< respecting God andoursclves, as superior to
*' the controul of human authority ; and have
" ever regarded free disquisition as the best
** mean'of illustrating tne doctrine, aad es-
'" tablishing the truth of Christianity. Let
*• the followers of Mahomet, and the zealots
^ of the church of Rome, support their seve-
" tzl religious systems, by damping every ef-
'^ fort ofthe* human intellect to pry into the
'' foundations of their faith ; but never can it
" become a Christian to be afraid of being asked
'*' a reason ofthe faith that is in him ; nor a
'*' Protestant iobe studious of enveloping hisre-
*' heion in mystery and ignorance ; nor the
" Church of England, to abandon that modera-
** titon by which she permits every individual,
** et sent ire qv4S -oelit, et qua sent iat dicer e/*

Gentlemen, I have the authority of
another great man to the same effect :' a

man to whom the Christian religion is more
indebted than to any other, since the days
of St. Paul ; I mean Dr. Lardner. — A Mr.
Woolston had published some discourses on
the miracles or our Saviour, in which he had
used language of a very offensive and irreve-
rend nature; he had been tried for blas-
phemy, and had been convicted : he published
a defence of his discourses, in which he speaks
of something of which he had heard as an in-
tended reply, using these words: — ^ which by
'* way of such a reply J should be glad to see
" handled."— Dr. Lardner publish^ an an-
swer to Mr. Woolston's fifth discburse; in his
preface to this Answer, vol. «, page 2, he
says — " If by the expression, * by way of such
' a reply,' he means a reply wHhout abusive
*' railing terms, or invoking the aid ofthe civU
" magistrate^ I have done it in that way; I
" wish Mr. Woolston no harm; I only wish
** him a sincere conviction, and profession of
'* the truth, effected and brought about by
*' solid reasons and arguments, without paint
** or penalties*' In page 6, ofthe same Pre-
face, he observes, ^ that some Christians be^
** ing of opinion that Christ's kingdom is not
*' of this world, and that it is his pleasure
** that men should not be compelled to receive
** his law by the punishments of this life, or
^ the fear of them, leave men to propose their
" doubts and objections in their own way ;
** that others have openly declared, tliat they
'* ought to be invited, and others that they
** ought to be permitted^ to pto(K>se their ob-
*< jections, provided it be done in a grave and
*' serious manner.** — Dr. Waddington, then
bishop of Chichester, in a letter to Dr. Lard-
ner, though he pays the latter jgreat compli-
ments for his answer to Woolston^ yet ex-
presses his disapprobation of these passages in
the preface ; in reply to which, the doctor ad-
dresses the bishop to this effect, vol. 1, page
1 17 : — " I believe that when I wrote those ex-
<< pressiohs, I had no regard to a demand
" made by any one, of a punishment 6n Mr.
" Woolston for his writings; lonly intended
" to disown, in plain terms, which might not
'' be mistaken, the principles of persecution,
^ which he had charged upon so many of his
" adversaries. As when I mentioned % reply
** without abusive terms, I had no reference
** to any reply written in that way; so, when
** I wished his conviction without pains and
" penalties, I had no reference to any d6-
" mand made of them. But I do own, that
" in the first paragraph, I had a reference to
'* a demifnd which I thought had been made
" for punishing him for his writings. And I
*' suppose, if he should be punished, it will
" be ror writing against Christianity, and not
" for his manner of doing it. I am far from
<' thinking, that Mr. Woolston has written In
" a grave and serious manner ; and I hate
" stronsly expressed my dislike of Ms man-
" ner. Your lordship freely declares, hfe ought
** not to be punisheo for being an inlidljl, n6r
'* for writing at all aga'mst theChhstlao fHi«

€77]

in pnhlUhifig the <* Age qf Reason,

n

A. D. 17d7.

f678

** giuOy which appears to me a Doblc decla-
^ ration. If the governors of the church, and
*' civil magistrates, had all along acted up to
** this principle, I think the Christian religion
** had oeen, before now, well nigh universal.
'' But I have supposed it to be a consequence
'' from this sentiment, that if men have an
** allowance to write against the Christian re-
** ligion, there must be also considerable in-
'' dulgence as to the manner likewise. This
*' has appeared to me a part of that meekness
'^ aiid foroearancey to which the Christian re-
*' ligion obliges «#, who are to reprove, re-
** buke, and exhort, with all long suffering.
'' The proper punishment of a low, mean, in-
** decent, scurrilous way of writing, seems to
^ be negjlect, contempt, scorn, and general iur
^* dignatioD. Your lorsdhip has observed, ex-
** tremely well, that this wa^ of writing is
** such as may justly raise the mdignation and
** resentment of every honest man, whether
" Christian or not. This punishment he has
** already had in part, and will probably have
^ more and more, if he should go on in his
*' rude and brutal way of writing. And if we
** leave all farther punishment to Him to
•* whom vengeance belongs, I have thought
*' it might be much for Uie honour of our-
** telves^ and of our religion. But if he should
** be punished fortbtr, the stream of resent-
*' mentand indignation will turn; especially
^* if the punishment should be severe ; and it
*' is likely that a tmall punishment will not
" suffice to engage to silence, nor to an alter-
*' ation of the manner of writing/'

Gentlemen, you observe these learned per-
sons (and I could cite many more opinions to
the same purpose) speak in favour of a much
greater latitude of liberty, in wrilina^ on sub-
jects of religious controversy, than I think I
hare at present any occasion to require. They
tell you, no human tribunal ought to inter-
pose; that even the intention of the writer
oughl not to be brought under the cognizance
of^the civU magistrate. All that Jliave at
present to contend is, that no malevolent in-
tention can be fairly imputed to the author of
this publication. I shall argue this from the
publication itself, which, in many parts of i(,
speaks in terms of the most reverential awe (>f
tne great Author of the universe, in terms the
most respectful ofthe character of the Founder
of the Christian rcHgion, and of the mor^l
doctrines which he taught; and I defy the
most active industry of my learned friend to
find a single passage in the whole work, in-
consistent with the must chaste, the most
correct system of morals. The first jjassage I
shall read to you is, the author's profession qf
faith, at the bottom of the first page : — " I be-
** lieve in one God, and no more; and I hope
" for happiness beyond this life. I befievp
" the equality of man, and I believe that reli-
^ gious duties consist in doing justice, loving
" mercy, and endeavouring to make oui* fe^
** low creatures happy .'^— The next begins $tt
the bottom ojpaje 8. The author, after ha vipg

u

u

described what he calls the Chriitian my tiiolo-
gy, proceeds in these words :— " That many
<< good men may have believed this strange fa-
" pie, and lived very good lives under that he -
" lief (for credulity is nota crime), is what I have
'* no doubt of. In the first place, thev were
" educated to believe it, and they would have
'* believed any thing else in the same man.-
'' ner. There are also many who have been
*' so enthusiastically enraptured, by whatthey
'' conceived to be the inbnite love of God to
'' man, in making a sacrifice of himself, tha^
'* the vehemence of the idea has forbidden^
** and deterred them from examining into th^
absurdity and profaneness of the story.
The more unnatural any thing is, the mor^
it is capable of becoming the object of disr
mal adoration. But, if objects for gratitude
and admiration are our desire, do they no^
present themselves every hour to our eyes f
Do we not see a fair creation prepared tp
" receive us the instant we are born — a world
" furnished to our hands that costs us no-
** thing ? Is it we that light up the sun : thai
'^ pour down the rain, and fill the earth with
" abundance? Whether we sleep or wake^
" the vast machinery of the universe stilj
'' goes on. Are these things, and the blessr
** mgs they indicate in future, nothing to us ?
** Can our gross feelings be excited by no other
" subjects than trageoy and suicide ? Or is th^
*' gloomy pride of man become so intolerable;
*' that notning can flatter it but a sacrifice of
" the Creator ?"

The next passage with which I shall trouble
you, explains the author^s ideas as to revela-
tion and the word of God, page 16—" Bu(
" some perhaps will say, are we to have no
" word of Goa > No revelation ? I answer,
" yes. There is a word of God ; there is a
*' revelation. The word of God is the creation
'* we behold ; and it is in this, which no hu-
** man invention can counterfeit or alter, thaf
" God speaketh liniversallv to man : humaj)
*' language is local and cnangeable. and i^
*' therefore incapable of being used as the
" means of unchangeable and universal in fornix
" ation. Theidea that God sent Jesus Christ
V to publish, as they say, the glad tidings tp
^ all nations, from one end of the earth to tHp
** other, is consistent only with the ignorance
" of those who know notning ofthe extent of
^* the world, and who believed as those world
** saviours believed, and continued to belie v^
"for several centuries, and that in contra^
" diction to the discoveries of philosophers,
" and the experience of navigators, that the
" earth was flat like a trencher, and that a
" man might walk to the end of it. But how
" was Jesus Christ to make any thins known
"to all nations? He could speak nut on^
** language, which was Hebrew, and there ar^
" in the world several hundred lai^guages..
" Scarcely any two nations speak the same
** language, or understand each other; an4
"as to translations, every man who knows
' any thing of languages, knows that it if

«

679] S7 GEORGE III. Trial of Thomas WiUianufor Bhuphcmy, [680

*' impossible to translate from one language

'< into another, not only without the danger

y of losing a great part of the original, but

•• frequently of mistaking the sense ; and,

** beside all this, the art of printing was wholly

*' unknown at the time in which Christ lived.

" — It is always necessary that the means

** which are to accomplish any end, be equal

** to the accomplishment of that end, or the

" end cannot be accomplished. It is in this

** that the difference between finite and infi-

" nite power and wisdom discovers itself.

** Man frequently fails in accomplishing his

*' ends, from the natural inability of the

** power to eflfcct the purpose ; and frequently

** from the want of wisdom to apply power

** properly. But it is impossible for infinite

** power and wisdom to fail as man failetb.

** The means it useth are always equal to the

** end ; but human languse, especially as

** there is not an univers^ mnguage, is inca^

^' pable of being used as a universal means of

^' unchangeable and universal information.;

*' and, therefore, it is not the means that God

^* useth in manifesting himself universally to

*' man. It is only in the creation that all our

*' ideas and conceptions of a word of God can

*' unite. The creation speaketh a universal

" language, independently of human speecli

*' or human language, multiplied and various

** as they be. U is an ever-existing original,

*' which every man can read. It cannot be

*' forged ; it cannot be counterfeited ; it cau-

** not be lost ; it cannot be altered ; it cannot

'< be suppressed. It does not depend upon the

*' wUl of man, whether it shall be published

*' or not; it publishes itself from one end of

'' the earth to the other. It preaches to all

** nations and to all worlds; and this word of

** God reveals to man all that is necessary for

** man to know of God. Do we want to con-

" template his power ?— We see it in the im-

'' mensity of the creation. Do we want to

" contemplate his wisdom ? — ^We see it in the

** unchangeable order by which the incom-

*' prehensible whole is governed. Do we want

'* to contemplate his munificence ? — We see

*' it in the abundance with which he fills the

*' earth. Do we want to contemplate hu

" mercy? — We see it in his not withholding,

*' that abundanee, even from the unthankfuT

** In fine, do we want to know what God is ?

" —Search not the book called the Scripture,

** which any human hand mi^ht make, but

" the Scriptures called the creation.-^The only

*^ idea man can affix to the name of God, is

*' that of a first cause, the cause of all thinzs.

'' And incomprehensibly difficult as it is for

'* a man to conceive what a first cause is, he

*^ arrives at the belief of it, from the ten-fold

'' greater difficulty of disbelieving it. It is

** difficult bevond description to conceive that

<< space can have no end, but it is more diffi-

" cult to conceive an end. It is difficult be-

" yond the power of man to conceive an eter-

** nal duration of what we call time ; but it is

** more impossible to conceive a time when

" there shall be no time. In like manner of
''reasoning, every thing we behold, carries
'* in itself^ the internal evidence, that it did
*^ not make itself. Every man is an evidence
** to himself that he did not make himself;
** neither could his father make himself, nor
** his grandfather, nor any of his race : neither
** could anv tree, plant, or animal, make it-
" self; and it is the conviction arising from
" this evidence that carries us on, as it were,
** by necessity to thebclief of a first cause eter-
*' nally existing, of a nature totally different
*' from any material existence we know of,
** and bv the power of which all thines exist,
** and this first cause man calls God. It is
*' only by the exercise of reason, that man
** can discover God. Take away that reason,
*' and he would be incapabl^f understanding
*' any thing; and in this case, it would be
"just as consistent to read even the book
*' called the Bible, to a horse as to a man.
" How then is it that those people pretend to
" reject reason ?"

. Gentlemen, I misht read a great many other
passases to prove the truth of my assertion,
that toe author expresses the most reverential
awe of the Great Author of the universe; but
that I may not fatigue your attention, I will
barely cite the passages. You will have an
opportunity, if you snalf think fit to retire, of
reading the passages at your leisure : they are
pages 18, 19, 2S, lOS, and 104.

To prove the truth of my proposition, that
the author " expresses himself in terms the
** most respectful of the character of the
'' founder of the Christian religion,^' I shall
trouble you to bear me read on^ two passa-
ges : The author having endeavoured to show
— with what success it is not for me to say,
nor is it material to the question you are to
decide — ^I'hat the theory of the Christian
church was borrowed from the Heathen my-
thology, proceeds thus *. page 6, ->'' Nothing
*' that is here said can apply even with the
" most distant disrespect to the real character
'^ of Jesus Christ. lie was a virtuous and an
'* amiable man. The morality which he
** preached and practised was of Uie most be-
" nevolent kind ; and though similar systems
*' of morality had been preached by Confu-
'' cius, and by some of the Greek philosophers
*' many years before, by the Quakers Muce,
" and by many good men in all ages, it has
" not been exceeded bv any." — Again he
says, page 7, " That such a person as Jesus
" Christ existed, and that he was crucified,
" which was the mode of execution at that
** day, are historical relations strictiv within
*< the limits of probability. He preached most
'' excellent morality, and the equality of man ;
*' but he preached also against the corruptions
" and avarice of the Jewish priests, ana this
'* brought upon him the hatred and venspeance
" of the whole order of priesthood. The ac-
*' cusations which those priests brought against
" him, were that of sedition, and conspinunr
«<agaiasi the Romui government, tovhica

681]

in pubtithing tht " Agi of Reason.**

A. D. 1797-

[689

** the Jews were then subject and tributary s
" and it is not improbable that the Roman
^ government might have 5ome secret appre-
*' hension of the effects of his doctrine, as
" well as the Jewish priests, neither is it im-
<< probable that Jesus Christ had in contem-
** plation the delivery of the Jewish nation
** frcMn the bondage of the Romans. Between
** the two, however, this virtuous reformer
" and revolutionist lost his life.*'

Genllemen, I have said I defy my learned
friend to find a single passage in the whole
work inconsistent with the most chaste, the
most correct svstem of morals. I will now go
farther ; I will venture to assert that some
.of the very passages selected for prosecution,
four out of the five that have beeU'read in
evidence afibrd the strongest proofs of the
chastity of the author's mind, or the benevo-
lence of his heart, of the general philanthropy
of his disposition, and of the correctness of
his moral sense. — Ue may be wrong, and I
do not feel it incumbent on me to argue that
he is right, in drawing the conclusions, that
he does, against the authenticity of the
Bible as containing the word of God .--If he
be wrong, his error is involuntary, it is the
erroneous application of principles, honestly
assumed as tne foundation of his reasoning :
it is an error which proceeds not from tne
wickedness and corruption of his heart. The
first passage runs in these words, '* When we
*' read the obscene stories, the voluptuous
** debaucheries, the cruel and torturous exe-
'** cutions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with
** which more than half the Bible is filled, it
** would be more consistent that we called it
** the word of a demon, than the word of God.
** It is a history of wickedness that has served
** to corrupt and brutalize mankind.'' page 10.

Gentlemen, this sentence, though not in
form, yet in effect, consists of two parts, an
assertion of fact, and a conclusion from that
assertion : Tlie assertion is, that there are in
the Bible obscene stories, descriptions of vo-
luptuous debaucheries, relations of cruel and-
torturous executions, and unrelenting vindic-
tiveness ; the conclusion is, that it were more
consistent to call the Bible, the word of a
demon, than the word of God: that it is a
a history of wickedness that has served to cor-
rupt and to brutalize mankind. — On the sup-
position that the assertion is true, I do not
mean, nor is it incumbent on me, to contend,
that the conclu»on is correct ; it is enough
for my purpose, that a man of good sense and
common understanding, unaffected by the
prejudices of education, sitting down with a
fair and honest intention to investigate the
truth, might without subjecting himself, in
the sober eye of reason, to the imputation of
41 wicked and malevolent intention, have
drawn the same conclusion from the same
premises.

Gentlemen, I should be guilty of frtajpAemy
ajgainst^ott, if I conld for a moment suppose
tudX you bad not ail of you xead tba Bible ; it

is impossible that any of you should have so
imperfect a sense of thedu^ you were called
upon to discharge, as to come here to sit in
judgment on the defendant without that pre-
vious qualification. Taking for granted, there-
fore, what must thus necessari^ be true, that
you have read the Bible, I appeal to your own
recollection, I ask you as fair and impartial
men, whether you have not read in that book,
stories, which, if found in any ether book,
you would justly have denominated obscene,
descriptions which, if found in any other
book, might fairly be terixied descriptions of
voluptuous debaucheries; relations of trans-
actions described as having taken place under
tho immediate direction of the Deitv, which,
if you had found them in any other book, you
would have called by the name of cruel and
torturous executions, and considered as exam<r
pies of unrelenting vindictiveness.

Gentlemen, when I began to prepare myself
for this defence, I did intend to read to you
from the Bible, several passages, to which,
from the recollection of former readine, I sup-
posed the author might have alluded^ when
he wrote this sentence; but when I read
anew some of those which might be ranked
under the class of obscene stories, and volup-
tuous debaucheries, I found the impression
made in early youth, had been copsiderably
effaced by time, and I now feel it my duty to
spare the modest ears of an English audience,
and not to read them ; but to assist your re-
collection, I will take the liberty of citing to
you, some of the roost prominent; and refer
you to the Bible itself for the detail.

The story of Sarah's giving Hagar lo
Abraham, uen. ch. 10.

The transaction of Lot's two daughters
with their father, Gen. ch. 19.

The disputes of Rachel and Leah, about
the possession of Jacob's person, and there
giving each her handmsdd to Jacob, Gen.
ch. 30.

The history of the rape of Dinah, Gen.
ch. 34.

The story of Judah and Tamar, Gen. ch. 38.

The solicitation of Joseph by Potiphar's
wife, Gen. ch. 39.

The story of Zimri and Cozbi the Midiani-
tish woman. Numbers, ch. 25.

The story of Samson and Delilah, Judges,
ch. 16.

The story of the Levite*s concubine abused
by the Gibeathites, Judees, ch. 19.

The story of Abigail, the wifeof Nabal, be-
coming the wife of^ David, 1 Samuel, ch. 25,

The story of Amnon, one of the sons of
David, debauching Tamar, the sister of Ab-
salom, another of David's sons, s Samuel,
ch. 13.

The story of the same Absalom debauching
his father's concubines in the face of all Israel,
on the hous(B-top, S Samuel, ch. 16.

And last, though not least in this class, the
story of David and Bathsheba, the wife of
Uriah, tha Hittita, % Samuel,. ch. 11.

<^] 37 GEORGE III. Trtat qf Thomas WiUiamiJor Blasphemy, [684

Th« only part of the Bible to which I shall
refer yoU| as containiDg a descriptioo of vu-
liiptuous debauchertei, is the Song of Solo-
which those, who settled the canon of

mon

Scripture, not knowing how to sanctify if
taken in the literal sense, have contrived to
metamorphose into a mystic declaration of the
ereat love of Chfist to his church ; the greater
hberality, however, of modern divines has
admitted it to be nothing more than a luxu-
rious love song, composea on occasion of the
fnarriage of Solomon with the princess of
Egypt; and that it is improperly permitted to
remain in the sacred canon.

Gentlemen, with respect to the instances
of cruel and torturous executions, and unre-
kntinjg vindictiveness, I do not feel myself
restrained by any principle of modesty from
reading ih^m ; and, therefore, I will £ive you
them at full length . The first to whicn I shall
crave your attention, is that of the treacherous
and cruel revenge of the two sons of Jacobs
Simeon and lievi, on the Sichemites, Genesis,
ch. 34.

Xm^ Kemfcn, — I do not know how far I
bught to sit here, and suffer a gentleman at
the bar to bring forward parts of the Bible
in this way. It is for you, gentlemen of the
jury, to My whether you wish to hear them
read.

Some iiftkc Jury nodding auent to hit lord^
ship, — Mr. Kyd continued.— If the gentle-
men of the jury do not wish to hear these
passa^s read, I do not wish to trespass on
their time or the patience of the Court, though
I feel thi3 interruption throws ihe into some
embarrassment as to the mode of proceeding
in my defence.

Som GenfUmanfram within the bar. — ^You
may cite the pajssages, as you did the others.

Lord ICenyoA.— You may cite the passages;
besides, sir, you have admitted that the gen-
tiemen of Uie jury must have read the Bible.

Mr. Kyd. — ^Thcn, ray lord, I will cite
them. -—The next in order is the history of the
elauehterof the Midianites, Numbers, ch. 31.

The elaugbter of the Canaanitcs by the
command ofOod ; particularly the conduct of
Joshua to the men of Ai, Joshua, ch. 8 ; and
the slaughter of the five kings, Joshua,
ch. 10.

The ptfivy of Sisera and Jael, and the song
of Deborah and Barak, in exultation at the
event, Judges, ch. 4, 6.

The murder of the people Jabesh Gilead,
for not having gone u^ with the rest of the
tribes against Benjamin in the case of the
Levite*9 concubine, Judges, ch. Si.

The account of Samuel hewing Agag in
pieces hefofe the X4>rd in GUgal, 1 Samuel
ch. 15.

The unnecessary and wanton cnielty of
David to the inhabitants of K#bbah, the chief
city of Ammon, taken aAer its siege by Joab
S Samuel, chi 12*

The murder pf 8agVp 9evf n innocent sons
by Davidson p/elence of t^irfiither> ^laugh-

ter of the Gibeonites being the cause of tbre«
years famine, 9 Samuel, en. 21.

David's dying charge to Solpmon resr
pecting Joab andShimei, 1 Kings, ch. S.

The slaughter of seventy of Ahab's sons,
in Jehu*s zeal for the service of the Lord,
3 Kings, ch. 10.

Gentlemen, I apprehend it is now pretty
cleat that a man might have written the first
passage inserted in this indictment, without
being actuated by a wicked and malevolent
intention to disturb the happiness of mankind.
I will, therefore trouble you no farther on
this headj but proceed to examine the second
passage which runs in these words, ''Did the
" book called the Bible excel in purity of idea^
<< and expression, all the books that are now
** extant in the world I would not, take it fof
'' my rule of faith as being the word of God,
** because the possibility would nevertheless
** exist of my beit^ imposed upon. But when|
** tee throughout the greatest part of thi^book
** scarcely any thing but a history of the
" grossest vices, and a collection of the most
<< paltry and contemptible tales^ I cannot dis-
'' honour my creator by calling it by his
" name.^' page 10.

Gentlemen, this passage does nut stand ii^
the pamphlet alone and unconnected with the
context; it is connected in sense with two
paragraphs preceding it; and, of the three, is
the last link in a resular chain of observa-
tion. It is an admitted maxim in prosecutions
of this ki^d, that a single offensive passage is
not to be selected and considered as conclur
five evidence against the defendant ; but it
must be compared with the context; or those
Other parts ox the work to whjch it seems to
bear a relation ; and from the whole taken
together, your judgment is to be formed. The
two pr^c^ing paragraphs to which I allude
are these —

'* If we permit ourselves to conceive right
« ide^s of tlungs, we giust necessarily affix the
'' i()ea not only of unchangeableness, but of
** the utter impossibility of any change tak-
'' ing place, by any means or accident what-
'' ever, in that which we would honour with
'' name of the word of God ; and, therefore,
<* the word of God cannot exist in any written
« or hun^n language.

'* The continually progressiva phange tp
'' which the meaning of words is subject, the
" want of aq fipivers^ language which ren-
'^ders translation necessary, tl^^ errors to
" which translations are again subject, the
'< mistakes of copyists and printers, together
'' with ^e possibility of wiliul ^ Iteration, are
<< of themselves evidences, that human Ian-
<' guage« inrhether in ^peecjii or in print, cax|-
** not be the vehicle bt ^e word of Goq.
'' The word of Gq4 exists in -something
<» else."

And then follows the passage which I have
just rea4 to you frofi) t^ifi indictmejat It fin
6U$erve,ilh^refore^ im\ tb^^^iitrHi^ pot cpm,-
po»ed of wftntoanja^rttooj^, |p?jd.e,YtiUifiut ex-

S85]

tn publishing the << Age of Reason.*'

A. D. 1797.

L686

animation, and nierety hazarde<) from a ma-
fignant intention to revile the Bible ; but K is
the natural result of a regular train of think-
ing, it follows almost as the inevitable conse-
quence of what immediately precedes it. One
of the attributes of God, acknowledged as a
fundamental article of the Christian faith, is
his immutability : it is an inevitable conse-
quence that his will should be immutable ;
and it seems by no means a forced or unna-
tural mode of reasoning, to say that, that by
which the manifestation of his will is made
toman, must also be immutable; in other
words, that the word of God should be immu-
table : but human language is mutable, and
as a vehicle of immutability, is subject to all
the objections pointed out in the two para-

fraphs of the context ; it cannot, therefore,
e considered as an unfair or a forced conclu-
sion *^ that the word of God exists in some-
•* thing else.** Is it then a subject of wonder,
that the author [nirsuing this train of thought,
should express himself as he does, in the pa-
ragraph which follows ? ** Did the book called
** the Bible," says he, " excel in purity of
« ideas and expression all the books that are
•" now extant in the world, I would not take it
<' for my rule of faith, as containing the word
** of God." Does he say this without a reason P
No ; he assigns a reason, which it will hardiv
be denied might occur to a thinking mind,
" because,'' says he, ** the possibility would
<' nevertheless exist of my being im'posed
" upon." Will any man say that such a pos-
sibility does not exist ? Is it criminal to sup-
pou its existence ? or if its existence may be
innocently supposed can h be criminal to be
influenced by such a supposition ? " But when
*' I see throughout the greatest part of this
« book, scarcely any thing but a history of
" the grossest vices, and a collection of the
'** roost paltry and contemptible tales, I can-
*' not dishonour my creator by calling it by
" his name."

Gentlemen, I admit the author goes too
far, when he represetits the Bible as contain-

• ing: " tcarcely any thing elte \jxil a histonr of
^ the grossest vices, and a collection of the

" most paltry and contemptible tales ;" yet
'certainly it will not be denied, that a considera-

• ble part of it is a history of the grossest vices ;
and perhaps your own recollection will sa-
tisfy you that it contains tales which, if
found m any other book, you would consider
as paltry and contemptible. The author, then,
refuses his assent to the divine authority of
the Biblei not from a malevolent intention to-
wards mankind, but from the reverence he
feels for the creator.

Gentlemen, I now proceed to the third pas-
■ sage inserted in the indictment: •* To charge
"the commission of things upon the Ai-
** mighty which, in their own nature, and by
" every rule of moral iustice, are crimes, as all
** assassination is, and more especially the as-
" sassination of infants, is matter of serious
' ** concern : the Bible tells us that those as-

'* sassinations were done by the ^^xpress com-
*« mand of God ; to believe, therefore, the
** Bible to be true, we must unbelieve all our
"belief in the moral justice of God; for
•* wherein could crying or smiling infants of-
" fend ? And to read the Bible without horror
<* we must undo everv thine that is tender
" sympathising and benevolent in the heart
*'ofman: speaking fur myself, if I had no
" other evidence that the Bible is fabulous
" than the sacrifice I must make to believe it
" to be true, that alone wouki be sufficient to
" determine my choice."

Gentlemen, this is reasoning, this is argu-
meot ; and it is such reasonmg, . such argu-
ment, as I believe a rational man will find
some difficulty to resist : that assassination is
a crime abhorrent from the tender feelings of
the human heart, will hardly be denied ; and
strong reasons would tn these timet^ be requir-
ed to induce a belief that such a crime could
be committed by the express command, or
even with the approbation of God. This pas-
sage alludes princinally to the slaughter or the
Canaanites by Josnua in the conquest of the
promised land, as appears from what imme-
diately precedes it:— *« When we read in ^le
•* books ascribed to Moses, Joshua and others,
*' that the Israelites came by stealth upon
" whole nations of people, who, as the history
" itself shows, had given them no offence :
** that they put all thote nations to the sword^
" that they spared neither age nor infancy ; that
" they utterly destroyed men nfomen and children;
" expression^ that are repeated over and over
"again with exulting ferocity; are we sure
" tljese things are facts? are we sure the
" creator of man commissioned these things
" to be done ? are we sure that the books
" -which tell us so, were written by his autho-
" rity ?"

Gentlemen, this is an objection to the au-
thority of the Bible, which has been made a
hundred times, and it has as often received
the same unvaried answer; whether that
answer be sufficient to satisfy a rational and
inquiring^ mind, I shall now proceed to exa«
roine. The bishop of Landaff, in his answer
to the "Age of Reason," admits, that, if the
actions which are here condemned, had been
committed by the sole authority of the agen|,
they would have merited the reproaches they
have received ; he says in pages 80, 81, "The
" destruction of the Canaanites exhibits to all
" nations in all ages, a signal proof of God's
" displeasure againstsin; it has been to others,
" and it is to ourselves a benevolent warning :
" Moses would have been the wretch you re-
" present him, had he acted by his own au-
*' thority alone ; but you may as reasonably
" attribute cruelty and murder to the judge of
" the land in condemning criminals to death,
" as butchery and massacre to Moses in exe*
" cutingthecommandofGod." — The strength
of the objection then is admitted to be, not
the assertion, that the actions abstractedly
considered, tieservc the judgment whith is

687] S7 GEORGE HI. Trial of Thomas WilUam$Jbr Blaiphmy, [688

passed upon them ; but that it is inconsistent i
with our ideas of the moral justice of God 1
that they should be commanded or authorized
by himx — Let us see then how it has been an-
swered ; " you hold it impossible/' says the
bishop, paee IS, '* that the Bible can be the
« word of God, because it is therein said, that
<< the Israelites destroyed the Canaanites by
'' the express command of God ; and to be-
" lieve tne Bible to be true, we must, as you
'^ affirm, unbelieve all our belief of the moral
** justice of God ; for wherein, you ask, could
** crying or smiling infants offend ? I am as*
*^ tonisbed that so acute a reasoner should at-
<' tempt to disparage the Bible, by bringins
^ forward this exploded and frequently refute?
*^ objection of Momm, Tindal, and Boling-
*^ broke. You profess yourself to be a Deist
« and to believe that there is a God, who
*^ created the universe, and established the
** laws of nature, by which it is sustained in
<* existence. You profess that from the con-
<' templation of the works of God, you derive
*' a knowledge of his attributes ; and you re-
'<ject the Bible because it ascribes to God,
<< things inconsistent, as you suppose, with
<' the attributes which you have discovered to
*^ belong to him ; in particular, you think it
«< repugnant to his moral justice, that he
<< should doom to destruction the crying or
<* smiling infants of the Canaanites. — Why do
^you not maintain it to be repugnant to bis
'< moral justice, that he shouloi suffer crying
'< or smilinz infants to be swallowed up by an
** earthquake, drowned by an inundation, con-
'' sumea by a fire, starved by a famine, or des-
« troyed by a pestilence ? The word of God
** is in perfect harmony with his work; crving
*^ or snuling infants are subjected to death in
" both. We believe that the earth at the ex-
«< press command of God, opened her mouth,
'* and swallowed up Korah, Dathan, and Abi-
** ram, with ther wives, their .sons and their lit-
*< tie ones. This ^ou esteem so repugnant to
'< God's moral justice, that you spurn as spu-
" rious the book in which the circumstance is
<< related. When Catania, lima, and Lisbon
*^ were severally destroyed by earthquakes,
'< men with their wiven , their sons, ana their
" little ones, were* swallowed up alive :— Why

'''do you not spurn as spurious the book of
'< nature, in which this fact is certainly writ-
'< ten, and from the perusal of which, you infer
" the moral justice of God T*

Gentlemen, this is the answer which has
been given a hundred times, to this objec-

'tion a hundred times taken; the objection
is, therefore, called an exploded and frequently
refuted objection ; and I suppose the crime
imputed to the author of the '' Age of Rea-
son" is, that the Answer has not satisfied him |
that he has from motives of malevolence, re-
vived an objection which he knew was ill

, founded. Gentlemen, observe the weakness
of this answer.
Lord Ktnytn, — I cannot sit in this place,

and bear this kind of discussion.

Mr. Kyd. — My lord, I stand here on the
privilege of an advocate in an ^nelish court
of justice : this man has applied to me to
defend him ; I have undertaken his defence ;
and I have often heard your lordship declare,
that every man had a right to be aefeuded ;
I know no other mode by which I can se-
riously defend him against this charge, than
that which I am now pursuing ; if your lord-
ship wish to prevent me from pursuing it,
you may as well tell me to abanaon my duty
to my client at once.

Lord Kenyon.-^Go on, sir.

Mr. JCy</.—My lord, I hope your lordship
does not conceive, I appear here with an
intention to insult the dignity of this Court ;
far be it from me to do any thing indecent
in itself, ur unbecoming the situation in
which I stand. My lord, it is this scanda^
lous prosecution which compels me in the
dischar^ of my duty to my cjient, to entelr
into a discussion, which it is its professed
object to suppress — a discussion which I
would gladly have avoided, which is highly
irksome to myself, and in its effects may be
dangerous to the public mind. My lord, I
feel the highest obligation to your lordship^
for having prevented the reading of the re-
maining passages inserted in the indictment ;
you have released me from one half of the
painful task, which I should otherwise have
considered it my duty to perform.

Gentlemen, when I said the answer was
weak, I did not mean from thence to con-
clude that the objection was unanswerable;
it may be ill founded, as I am bound to sup-
pose every objection to the authority of the
Bible must be: but I have never yet read or
heard an answer to it, which satisfied my
mind ; it may be suiceptihle of an answer, but
it has never yet received it. Future theolo-

§ians may perhaps discover it ; but till that
iscovery oe made, it surely can never justly
be imputed to a man as a crime, that fairly
exercising his reason on the subject, he is
stnick with the force of the objection — ^I re-
turn now to the examination of the Answer ;
it amounts to no more than this, that as it is
no objection of the moral justice of God, that
by an earthquake, an inundation, or a confla-
gration, a famine, or a pestilence, men,
women and children, the innocent and the
guilty, may promiscuously meet their death,
so neither is it inconsistent with the same at-
tribute, that, by a special manifestation of his
will on a particular occasion, he should com-
mand a whole nation promiscuously to be put
to death for the crimes of a part.

Gentlemen, this is reasoning by compari-
son; and reasoning by comparison is often
fallacious; on the present occasion, the fal-
lacy is this : that in the first case, the persona
perish by the operation of the general laws of
nature, not sufiering punishment for a crime ;
whereas in the latter, the general laws of
nature are suspended or transgressed, and
God commands the slaughter to avenge his

689]

in pulhihing iht *' Ag$ qfRcasonJ

• A. D. 1797.

[690

ofitnded will.— Is this . then a sutisfactory
ftoswer to the objection ? / think it \snot;
another, may think so too ; which it may be
fiiirly supposed the author did ; and then the
objectton, as to him^ remains in full force,
and he' cannot, frpm insisting upon it, be
fiuriy accused of malevolent intention.

Gentlemen, for the present, I pass by the
fourth passage inserted in the indictment, as
the fifth has a more immediate connexion
with the three which I haVe already consi-
dered. It consists of but a single line picked
from the middle of a sentence; taken by
itself, it is no doubt uncourtly and offensive. —
''It is a book of lies, wickedness, and blas-
** phemy :'' — but connected with the context,
appears to be nothing more than the result,
very coarsely expressed, no doubt, but still
the result of a connected chain of thinking ;
the passage in which it stands in the book, is
in page 58, and runs thus : ** People in gene-
** rai know not what wickedness there is in
" this pretended word of God. Brought up
'' in habits of superstition, they take, it for
^ granted that the Bible is true, and that it is
" good ; they permit themselves not to doubt
'^ of it ; and they carry the ideas they form of
^ the benevolence of the Almighty, to the
''boek, which they have been taught to be-
** lieve was written by his authority. — Good
'' heavens ! it is quite another thing, it is a
** book of lies, wickedness, and blasphemy ;
** for what can be ereater blasphemy than to
'' ascribe the wickedness of man to the orders
•* of the Almighty r

The whole, you observe, proceeds on the
same principle with the passages I have
already examined, that the author cannot,
consistently with his ideas of the attributes
of God, admit the Bible as containing the re-
velation of his will: the same observations,
which I have taken the liberty of suggesting
to you on the other passages, might ne ap-
plied to this ; but I will not fatigue vour at-
tention by repeating them. — I proceed to the
passage which stauus the fourth in the indict*-
meot, and is in these words : ^' I have now
** gone through the examination of the four
** books ascribed to Matthew, Mark, Luke,
^ and John ; and when it is considered that
'' the, whole space of time > from the cruci-
" fixion to what is called the ascension, is but
**' a few days, apparently not more than three
'<• or. four, and that all the circu^nstances are
'^ reported to have happened nearly about the
** same spot, Jerusalem, it is, I believe, im-
** possible, to find in any story on record, so
" many and such glarius absurdities, contra-
''dictions and lalsehooas^ as are in those
'* books."

Gentlemen, I have expressed my obligation
to his lordship for having saved me from the
task of defending the rem.ainin^ passages in*
lerted in. the indictment; I wish I had to
thank biqi lor savins me from the task^ of
defending this : as the matter now stands,
liowever, it is my duty to defend it. Gentle-

VOL, XXVI,

men, this passage is the result of a serious
examination of the books in question, which
begins at page 89, and ends at page 91 : if
you will have the goodness to retire and read
It with attention, I tliink ^ou will find it diffi.
cult to say the couclusion is not warranted by
the premises; I have myself made a similar
examination, and I find it impossible to deny
that there are, at least apparent inconsisten*
cies and contradictions in those books, which
it is difBcult to reconcile : I hold in my hand
a more extensive and laboured examination
of them, which demonstrates to me, that
those inconsistencies and contradictions are
numerous and important; and that they muii
be so is evident from the number of concor-
dances of the Gospel, with which learned
divines have thought it necessarv to favour
the public; had tney seen in those books
no apparent inconsistencies and contradic-
tions of importance, it would have been folly
to compose such laboured and voluminous
works, with a view to reconcile them to each
other.

Gentlemen, I hope, by this time, it appears
to you, as I protest it does to me, that there is
no evidence of any immoral, wicked, or
impious intention to be collected from the
publication itself; and you are not to impute
such intention to the author or to the publisher^
merely because the publication impeaches
those articles of faith which you yourselves
have been taught to believe ; the very reli-
gion, for the vindication of whose h(t)noor, it
IS pretended, this prosecution has been insti-
tuted, forbids you to draw so uncharitable a
conclusion.

Gentlemen, good policy and a prudent re-
gard for the interests of the Christian reli^on,
ought to have prevented the institution ot this
prosecution ; and I submit to your good
sense, whether the same policy, and the same
prudent regard ought not to have its weight
m procuring the acquittal of the defendant.
If the Christian religion be founded in truth ;
if it will stand the test of reason, the more it
is examined, the more firmly will it be esta-
blished in the minds of men ; if some pro*
duce arguments against it, there must be
others, who are willing and able to defend it;
if it be founded in truth, it is even for its in-
terests that it should from time to time, ba .
seriously attacked : men educated in the be-
lief of its truth, are apt to receive its doctrines
or its supposed doctrines without examination,
and it is not till those doctrines are disputed,
that its professors arc under the necessity of
makiug themselves acquainted with the prin-^
ciples on which their taith is founded ; from
want of . e.xamination, many doctrines have
been incorporatediWith the Christian system,
which were never.aaught by Christ. The ene-
mies of religion sdcceeding in their attacks oa
those adventitious doctrines, have boasted of
a triumph over the Christian systeni, itself;
it has been only by a closes examination pro-
voked by those very attacks, that the real

« Y

691] 37 GEORG£ HI. Trial qfThamat WiUiam/or BlatpKmy^ [691

tlruths of Christianity have b6en separated
from those spurious incorporations, and the
system restored to its native purity and lustre.
To punish men for disputing the tnrth of
Christianit>%is almost to admit that it will not
bear the test of a rigid examination ; the effect
of such punishment, at least, is, to harden
men in their opposition, and to confirm them
in their unbelief; it was under the severest
persecutions that Christianity spread and
nourished ; it established itself at last on the
imperial throne ; its professors having thus
obtained possession of power, became in their
turn persecutors of their opponents, in direct
violation of the precepts oi their divine mas-
ter; the effect was such as might have been
Expected ; the human mind is uniform in its
operations ; those reeions wher^ Christianity
«tras first planted, and where it flourished for
three centuries, are now the seat of another
>«ligion. But, ^ntlemen, lest my argument
fthould be considered as entitled to a less
degree of attention from the situation in
which I. now stand, and the duty I have
undertaken to fulfil, I will refer you to an
authority which cannot be suspected ; I will
re&d to you the remarks of Dr. Lardner on
the council of Nice. That council was held
finder the auspices of Constantine about the
year 325. It was there that the articles
which have since been received in Christian
churches in the form and under the title of
the Athanasian Creed, were first established
is the articles of faith ; many members of that
council were eompelied to subscribe them ; it
is this compulsion which Dr. Lardner repro-
bates; it is to this compulsion that he imputes
the effects I have just described. " Thus,"
■ays he, *• this council of ]Nice introduced
** authority and force in the church, and
♦* aflbirs of religion* Or, if authority had
•* been introduced before, th^ now openly
^ countenanced if, and ^ve it a farther sanc«
^ tlon. This wav of acting, may be supposed
* to have been the chief cause of the ruin of
** the Christian interest in the East This and
** the like determinations of speculative dot-
^ trines, and the violent methods by which
^ th^y were enforced, may be reckoriep to have
^ paved the way for Mahometanism more
** than any thing else. By these means igno-
** tehee and hypocrisy, and tedious rituals
** came to take place of honesty, true piety,
^ and undissembled, spiritual and reasonable
** worship and devotion. In about three hun-
«< dred years after the ascension of Jesus^
^ without the aid of secular power, or church
** authority, the Christian religion spread
^ over a large part of Asia, Europe, and
^Africa: and at the accession of Constan-
** tine, and convening the council of Nice, it
** was almost every where, throughout those
** Countries, in a flourishing condition. In
** the space of another three hundred years,
«' Of a little more, the beauty of the Christian
" religion was greatly corrupted in a large
** part of that extenty its glory defeced^ and its

<' light almost extin^islied. To what i
*' this be so much owing at to the determiini*
'^tions and transactions of the council of
** Nice, and the measures then set on fooi^
'* and followed in succeeding times i^ — After
many other observations, he says, ^' Those
^ Arians confessed with the mouth, and
^ signed with the hand, what they did not
<< believe. For that they are to be bkroedl
** But how came they to do so ? It was
** owing to a fear of ignominy and punub-
** ment. But why were the^r put in fear f
** Why was a law made to pnnisn snch as did
'* not believe the consubstantial doctrine f
*< They offended who iignedi it is allowed;
** and are they innocent, who had before thenr
** a temptation to sign ? Was there a necee-
^ sity, that they should be required to sign^
** whether they believed or no ? Can yoa
** show any ground or authority firom reason,
" or from Jesus Christ, whereby you are al-
^ lowed or enjoined to require ^our brethrea
'* to sign certain speculative articles whether
^ they believe them or not? Nay, is not this^
** quite contrary to the design and exampte
*^ of the Lord Jesus, who never proposed ta
** men any arguments, but such as were
^suited to gain the jud^ent? And who;^.
^* when many forsook bna who had foU
** lowed him for a thnc, took that oppor-
** tunity to refer tl to the choiee of those
** who still stayed with him, whether tkef
** also would go away ? If any pretend it to
^ be of importance, that others shonld sign or
V profess certain doctrines supposed by tnen^
" to be true; I would answer, that sinceri^
** is of yet greater importance. And yoa
^ ought never to endeavour to secure the
^ interest of speculative points, with the pre-
** judice of what is of greater moment, iio*
** nesty and integrity." Again — ^ Possibly
** soihe may «ay that such thoughts as these
** are founded upon the experience and obser-
^ vation of latetages; and Ihatal) this is more
** than could be reasonably expected of any
<^men, however vrise, at that timb. To
** which I answer, that it is no more than
^ might have been expected; (br it is not
** more than #hat men are taught by th4
'' common principles of equity. Tue GospeL
** too, te^cnes and enacts modeiatfon ana
*^ fbrbdirfthbe, And condemns all ithpositioti
** on the cohsciences of m^n, and )U1 fotte And
<< violence in things of religfon.^1 h«ve
<< taken ill thi» free&ns, thus to pi-dpose thes^
^ thoughts. But 1 do not mention them 86
" much by tir^y oFUakne •and cettsuce, as with
^ a view of artienddaent; that ChriatSans iA
** general may'at len^ be ao winfe ai to coik-
^ suit the true interest of their relieion : and
<' hoping, that they wheite in hien statipna
'^ in the church, and have a poweHminftnenee^
^ will improve all oppDitunities, and use thefr
** best endeavours, that the moderation of
** Christians may be known unto all meb,^

In another volume, the doctor enlai^ en
the sane idea, vol. ii. p. 9. ** We miM wilk
II

«>3]

,iM jmiliMng i/k ** Ag^ qfReg$ofU

«»

A. D. 1797.

[694

^ TertuUi^ openly profeas, that the new law
«' does not defend itself by the sword of the
<' magistnite ; forasmuch as it hath pleased
<' Christ, tho author of it, that no man should
^ be forced to tlie embracing of his law by
^ the punishments of this life, or U)e fear
** of them, as appears from many places of
** the New Testament, not only of Paul, but
^ also of John, and Luke, and Matthew.
^* Nor is it (as the same father says at the
<' end of his book to Scapula) a part of reli-
•' gion io force religion, which must be taken
** up freely, not upon compulsion. Who will
^ lay upon me the necessity of believing what
-^ I will not, or of not believing what I will
*' (as Lactanttus says) ? Nothing is so volun-
f* tary as religion ; to which, if the mind be
** averse, religion is quite destroyed. Faith is
** to be wrouffht by persuasion, not by com-
^ pulsion. &veri^ kat always done harm,
«< and always will do harm ; and our minds,
** like noble and generous steeds, are best ma-
** naged with an easy rein ; rather by reason
** than authority, rather by good words than
** by threats.'' He then refers to the opinion
of Doctor Bentley, who, in a sermon at a pub-
lic commencement at Cambridge, says, ^ It
^^ l^s, pleased the Divine wisdom, never yet
** to leave Christianity wholly at leisure from
^ opposers ; but to give its professors that per*
^' petual exercise or their industry and zeal.
** And who can tell if without such adversa-
^ ries to rouse and quicken them, they might
** not, in long tract of time, have grown re-
** miss in the duties, and ia:norant of the due-
** trines of relieion ?'* " 1 hese learned men,"
continues the doctor, ^* have assured us upon
*< the foundation of the scriptures, of the fa-
rthers, and of reason, that all force on the
r minds of men in matters of belief is con-
** trary to religion in general, and to the
r Christian rehsion in particular; and that se-
r verity instead of doing good, has always
'' done harm. These points qiight be enlarged
** upon, but nothing new can be offered.
** Possibly some good men may still be in
r some doubt concerning the issue of admittine
^ the principles of relieion to be freely and
" openly canvassed. But I thinks that such
*' may nnd satisfaction even upon this head
** in the passages I have quoted, provided
** they will be pleased to. consider them.
*' However, I will add a few observations
** briefly upon this matter. It Is an old say-
** ing which has been much admired and ap-
^ plauded for its wisdom, that truth is great
** and strong above all things. There is cer-
** taiply some real excellence in truth above
'^ error. Great and Important truths are
^ clearer than others, ana not likely to be
** mistaken, hu% to shine the more for ezami-
'* nation. Our own time also, affords a con-
'^ vincing instance to all that will open their
** eyes to observe. The Protestant states and
''kmgdom8of£urope»as they enjoy greater
*' liberty than others, proportipnabjy exceed
^tl^ir Me'^bbptics in Jbe jMstoeasjofibeir

" sentiments, and the goodness of their lives.
** Which advantage can beascribed to no other
^* cause so much as the liberty we enjoy. Fur
*« introduce amon^ us the tyranny they are
*' under ; and xne shall be as ignorant, as super-
'* stitious, and as corrupt as they. If then men
*' should be permitted amongst us, to go on
" delivering their sentiments freely in roat-
'' ters of religion, and to propose their ubjec*
" tions against Chrittianity itself; I appre-
*' hend we have no reason to be in pain for
" the event On the side of Christianity I
^' expect to see, as hitherto, the greatest share
** of learning, good sense, true wit, and fair-
" ness of diiputation; which things, I hope,
" will be superior to low ridicule, false argu*
" ment, and misrepresentation. This victory
'^ obtained upon the ground of argument and
« persuasion alone, by writing and discourse^
'< wijl be honourable to us and our religion :
'* and we shall be able to reflect upon it with
'' pleasure. We shall not only keep that good
'^ thing we have received, but shall deliver it
*' down to others with advantage. But a vic-
'< tory secured by mere authority is no less tm
*' be dreaded than a defeat. It may appear a
** benefit for the present; but it really under-
*' mines the cause, and strikes at the root of
** our holy profession.*' '

Gentlemen, thus much I have thought it
incumbent on me to submit to you in defence
of the work and of the author; because, if the
work and its author can be successfully de-
fended, it follows almost as a matter ofcourte
that the publisher must he acquitted : I say
this follows almost as a matter of course, be-
cause I feel myself bound to admit, that a man
may from malicious motives, publish that
which another might innocently write; btit
these motives must be shown to exist frou

THE CONDUCT OF THE PtJBLISHER HIMSELF; in

the present case no attempt to show their ex-
istence has been made ; I am, therefore, at li-
berty to conclude, that if I have succeeded in
defending the work, I must necessarily have
succeeded in defending my client. But there
is another ground of defence peculiar to the
defendant. The pamphlet, I believe, was
originally published in France, was reprinted
here in the year 1794, and went through se-
veral editions ; yet nobody thought of prose-
cuting the publishers: at least nobody wa$
prosecuted : it had sunk into oblivion, where
It might quietly have remained, had it not
been for the Answer of the Bishop of Lan-
daff, which raised it from the grave ; that An«
swer was published in the year 1796, and the
defendant printed the present edition from no
other motive than to gain something in the
regular course of his trade, and to gratify the
curiosity of the public, who wished to know
what it was the bishop had thought worthy
of an answer. I am not indeed enabled to
prove,^ by the strict rules of evidence, the
truth bf this cave, because the persons by
whose testimony I must necessarily prove the
most material part of it^ might refuse to be

£95] 87 GEORGE IIL Trial of Tkmoi WUUam/or Blmfhmy, [GOG

examined on the ground that thek testimony
might subject them to be put in the situation
in which the defendant now stands I be«
lieve, however, what I have stated is generally
admitted to be true ; ahd, therefore, I trust
the defendant will have the same benefit
from it as if it had been regularly proved.

Gentlemen, the faculty of reason is the
inost precious gift of God to man; it was
given him to be freely exercised on every
subject which could interest him or attract

Reflt.
The Honourable ThomoM Ertkine ;
Gentlemen of the Jury ;— I am certainly
bound in respect for the learned gentleman
who has just sat down, to believe that he
really felt, as he expressed it, bis delicate and
difficult situation, in having the task of de-
fending a performance of the description now
before you, with Uiat decorum which he ac-
knowledges must be observed in a court of
justice. Indeed, I have already shown you, and

his attention ; it will not be denied that every i in a manner Mr. Kyd has not been able to
man is at liberty to entertain what opinions I controvert, that if there be a syllable of truth
he pleases on religion as well as on every ! in the parts of the book brought before you.

other subject ; he has a ri^ht, without human
control, to examine and discuss ; — "true," it
will perhaps be said, '* but he has not the right
of publishing to the world the result of his
discussion, in contradiction to the established
religion of the cow*try." — With this restric-
tion, what advanta^, what satisfaction can
he derive from his right of discussion ?
Where is Ihe boasted superiority of the con-
•Btitution of this country over those which are
enslaved by the inquisition ? Where, as here,
as every where, the thought of man is free
from human control. But it is a part of the
social nature of man that he should commu-
nicate his thoughts to his fellows ; it is an at-
tribute of reason that it can never be success-
fully cultivated without that commimication ;
Icnowledge is progressive ; without the know-
ledge of the labours of those who have pre-
ceded him, a single individual could learn but
little ; after a long life spent in contempla-
tion, he ml^ht sink into the grave, without
having attained even the first rudiments of
science : In short it is to an unrestrained right
of discussion, and free communication that we
must attribute the advanced state of the sci-
ences and the arts, that we are indebted for 1
all the advantages we have derived from the
Reformation and the Revolution. It has been
said that this work has had an extensive cir-
culation, and has done much mischief; I am
not aware of any mischief it has done, or that
its circulation has been extensive : I rather
think that till this prosecution, or at least till
the Answer of the Bishop of Landaff, it was
very little known, and excited but little inter-
est ; I had never seen it myself, till I was
called upon to defend it. — One effect, I have
reason to believe it has had, at which the pro-
moters of the present prosecution can hardly
be displeased ; many of the author's political
converts, offended with him for attacking
their religion, have become less attached to
his political principles.

Gentlemen, you have an important duty to
discharge both to the public and to the defen-
dant ; the fate of the latter is in your breasts ;
you will discharge that duty in a manner sa^-
tisfactory to your consciences, and I am bound
to presumci satisfactory to your country.

the Court has no jurisdiction on any subject
whatsoever ; and it is a point, therefore, which
I might have confidently submitted to the
noble and learned judge, whether I had not a
right to interrupt the learned gentleman, in
almost every eentence he has uttered ; but I
thought that both religion and justice would
be best served by his being heard.

From part of his discourse, indeed, the pro-
secution derives support. My part is simpli*
fied and shortened, by his correct description
of the crime, and by his not attempting to
distinguish t>etween the publisher and the
author, acknowledging that the intention of
the one must be the criterion of the defence
of the other. I am also relieved from trou-
bling you again, on the liberty of the press,
which, God forbid, that I should dispute or
undervalue. You indulgently attended to my
opening, and I have now therefore only to
ask vou, whether any thing has been sai J by
my learned friend, in support of the undoubt^
ed privilege of free and public discussion, that
goes beyond what I not only had admitted
to-day, but which Mr. Kyd himself most ob-
ligingly referred to in my repeated exertions
for its support.

I admit also the good sense and soundness
of every thing quoted from Dr. Lardner, and
the bishop of Landaff. They claimed for
themselves the protection of neither pains nor
penalties against the fair antagonists, or even
the defamers of their works in the forum of
inUllectual contronoerty ; nor do I think that
pains or penalties were likely to vbit snch
opponents ; but whatever those learned men
might have thought or written, from a confi-
dence in scripture, on the uselessness or
impolicy of such prosecutions, they could not
alter the criminal law of England, nor enable
Mr. Kyd, to appeal with any possible success
to their opinions, if his client fell within its
restraints. I have no difficulty, nevertheless,
in disavowing the propriety- of prosecution iii
a doubtful case, or in any indeed, which could
have a single advocate or supporter amongst
honest and enlightened men. Nobody ever
thought of questioning by indictment the
most erroneous opinions on the authority or
expositions of scripture, when the work was
obviously addressed by its author to the con^
sciences and understandings of his country-
meor or to the world of literature* in -iSSL

«f)71

in publishing the ** Age of Reason*'

A. D. 1797.

[698

coiiotries; but the prosecutors, some of
'Whom are ministers of the church, others
of them magistrates, and all of them re-
spectable men, having considered the book
before you, to be qf an entirely different de-
acription, unanimously concurred m the fit-
ness of this prosecution, — not to support the
authority of scripture, which they knew
nothing could destroy ; but, bv interrupting
the circulation of this detestable book amongst
the weak and ignorant, to preserve to them
the consolations of religion, and to secure our
national morals firom the most mischievous
and dangerous contamination. Thit was their
motive, but whether they were right or
wron^, whether the prosecution be wise or
impoRtic, cannot now be the guettion. The de-
fendant is accused before you, and must be
convicted or discharged as the law of this
iand ought to adjudge, which you are sworn
to obey, accurdmg as the evidence in y'our
honest opinions shall warrant and direct. '

Gentlemen, Mr. Kyd has, as I have already
stated to you, correctly described the offence :
yet he seems to think it incapable of the same,
precise definition in a criminal charge as
other cases of misdemeanor. Blasphemously ^
he sa^s, is derived from two Greek words,
signifying, to hurt, injure, or wound re-
putation, and good opinion. Trophanely^
from a Latin word, signifying the propbana-
tion of holy places or persons. And impious
from the Latin word pivSf signifying rever-
ence for aacred things ; and that these terms,
therefore, had often shifted and been applied
differently^ not only by individuals against
individuals^ but by nations against nations;
invading conquerors having, as he said, upon
those principles, destroyed the temples of the
conquered, as prophanations, whilst the
conquered in their turns, inveighed against
their invaders, as the violaters of every thing
that was sacred. To all this, I can only
answer, that if Mr. Kyd had come before us
as a foreign conqueror, demolishing our
churches, as irreligious, imnious, and pro-
phane, our only course would have been to
Keep out of his way, if we could, or to have
mane the best terms with him in our power
for the preservation of our religion and our
lives ; but when he condescends to appear
before yon in the humbler character of a £ri.
tish subject, and acknowledges the authority
of the court in which he pleads to be wholly
dervoedfrom the Bible which he has reviled and
stigmatised, I am a little at a loss to under-
sUtnd his argument, or to feel the force of his
historical remarks, because it is a belief in
scripture alone, that could qualify you to ac-
cept the oath you have taken, or bind you to
the diKharge of its obligations.

Another absurd contradiction followed:
he told you in a quotation from the book
he is defending, that the author had done
complete justice to the character of Christ;
admitting, that though his system of mo-
ralitj haobeen preached before, by Confucius

and others, yet that all his preachings were
most moral and excellent. Now, what other

Ereachings or sayings of our Saviour had ever
een seen, or known or heard of, but in the
very gospels which record them, and which
he presumes to ridicule and defame? When
this absurdity has thus only been presented
fairly to your minds, I might surely spare you
the trouble of hearing me any longer on it;
yet the conclusion of the same sentence is
such a climax of folly, that it ought not to be
suppressed ; where, in speaking of the phtlo-
sopners and moralists, irora whom the gos-
pel had borrowed its doctrines, the book be-
ibre you, after naming Confucius, and some
of the Greek philosophers before Christ, con-
cludes the list with the opinions of our Qua^
hers since. Now can any thing be so dis-
gustingly stupid as this ? I may say so without
ofiPence, as the words are not Mr. Kyd's, but of
the book : perhaps, indeed, it is almost an
arraignment of the prosecution for dragging
out of its self-devoted obscurity, a composi-
tion so innocent from its perfect folly, as that
it could gravely maintain that our Saviour
had borrowed /rom our Quakers the religion
which he taugnt.

But another, and if possible a still grosser
absurdity arises out ot this pretended rever-
ence of the author for the character of Christ,
**asa most amiable andvirtuous man ;** — though;
according to him, he was not, it seems, of
the divine nature he assumed, nor was sent
by God, according to the prophecies of the
Old Testament, upon any possible construc-
tion of them, even if they were authentic,
which the author not only denies, but con*
demns as blasphemously false. Now, con-
sistently with this total denial of our Saviour's
character and mission, what becomes of his
acknowledged virtue which no man ever de-
nied or questioned, and which Mr. Paine dis-
tinctly admits ? since, in that case, he must
have betn an audacious impostor, as he con-
stantly appealed to the prophecies concerning
him, and applied them to himself even in the
most minute circumstances of his life and death,
declaring at the same time, throughout all the
gospels, that he was the son of God, appoint-
ed before the foundation of the world for the
redemption of mankind. It is therefore
quite impossible to admit the pure and moral •
cnaracter of our Saviour, and yet deny the di-
vine nature and character which he assumed.
Christians who differ from each other, as to
the mysterious nature of Christ, build all their
differences upon that interpretation of the
words of our Saviour himself, which they con-
sider to be the best; but those who are not
Christians, though they are at Hberty to deny
altogether the truth of every part of scripture,
cannot consistentW admit the integrity of
Christ ; because, if the whole New Testament
be unfounded, it was clearly an imposture on
the part of its author, who must have known
it to be untrue. This is a dilemmal, which
has not been sufficientfyi if at all^ urged by but

699] 37 OEOR&E Ul. Triai qf Thovm JViUiamM/or Bla^hemy, [fOQ

.igteaiest divines i4;aiast Ibe unbelievers of
jubristianityy wbo bave one and all I belieYe
.Admitted tbe purity and integrity of Cbrist

Gentlemen, Mr. Kyd, after throwing down
to me the gauntlet of defiance to find a sinjgle
passage in tbe whole work he is defending
inconsistent with the chasest system of
morals, read of bb own accord this pauage :
** When we reflcd on the cruel and torturous ese-
^ cutions, and the unrelenting wickedness with
** which more than one half rf the Bible isJUled^
** a would be more consistent, that it should be
** called the Word 0/ a Demon, than theWord of
** God, It is an history ^wickedness that has
^ mroed to corrupt and brutalize mankind,'^

Now, I am willing to rest tbe whole cau^e
upon tbe posnble good faith of this sentence
he has quoted, andJball be contented to waive
all the protections of tbe law as it has been
delivem in the most solemn juagments of
our courts, if you can believe tbat tne author
.wrote this as bis honest, conscientious opinion,
and beliff, Mr. Paine is by no means a weak
nor deprived of tbe foundations of a

right iu<|gmeht by isnorance or superstition.
Koboay who has read bis '* Common Sense,''
addressed to the Americans at the period of
)ier revolution, can refuse to acknowlei^ bis
masculine understanding; and I db therefore
confidently maintain that such a roan caxmot
ask credit' for believins, that the crimes of the
Jewisb nation before Uie period of tbe gospel,
irbich be himself adinits was preached, to
correct and sti^atlze, and to deliver the
workl from their contagion and example,
was nevertheless pubjislied to brujtali^tbe
world by their record.

I amnot called upon, gentlemen, whilst our
churches, and the writings of so many pious
and learned men are open for our instruction,
to illustrate tbe divine authority of tbe Old
and New Testament, taken as one whole, for
our direction and happiness. The/rst is hiS'
torical abnost throughout, and tbe history of
man must be the history of vices as well as of
virtues ; but they were recorded in scripture
together, to unfold, and to sMpjK^rt the grand
system of propbecv, which was in future ages
to be the irresistible evidence of its truth, and
to .warn future generations aeainst even the
temporal ronsequences of wickedness by the
signal judgments of God.

On tbe same principle, would any but a
lunatic assert, that mankind were brutaliz^
by the proceedings of courts of Justice, be-
ci^use the most atrocious and monstrous
crimes were left by them on r,ecord? , ^re
they not, on tbe contrary, laid open to tb^
whole world as the best e^mples toi 4^ter
men from oammittipg ih^m? ^nd in the
>Mred wi;itings tl^ey <kre ;pever. ^ltrpduGe4
^t.for tbat b«»evpieiDit.andM4u{^ry pyrnpiie,
In the uuiyersal de^tru^\^>n of Sqaop:i ^4
}he,iadividual,puiusbf9«i|rof Qnan,.Ve/sec
ja}e.p9(>«<^fi9t^AiM>f:^ailWM)ifffl/t .^s aoi

purpose of .God in the popuktion of tlie
world : and whoever will careful^' ei^amin^
the books of tbe Old Testament (remembering
always the nation to fhich they were addressed)
will not only be delighted but astonished.—
The wickedness of Joseph's brethren was a
necessary and sublime introduction to tbe
prophecy, tbat the Messiah should come out
of a particular natign and family, according to
God*s earliest promise to Abraham, tbe pious
father of a particular tribe, which tribe was to
come out pf Egypt, and which you find, dis-
tinguished accoroinely by the prophets from
all the others, that tne promise might be dis-
tinctly seen to be fulfilled, in the known ee-
nealogyofChrist-rlt was not intended that
the truth of divine revelation should burst
iipon tne world by a sudcfen iisht, but that it
spould be gradually established by tbe irresis-
tible evidence of super-human prophecy;
which rendered the bistory of tbe Jewish na*
tion most material in the manner the Old
Testament has recorded it, of which surely
the destruction of their temple and tbe ex<r
tinction of their government are most meqao*
rable instances; bK)tb having happened as
predicted, after the Messiah had come : nor
could imperial power tliough purposely ex*
er^d to disgrace the prophecy, raise' one
stone upon another of the structure tbat bad
been destroyed. No wonder, then, that tbe.
enemies of Christianity should rail at the
Old Testament which has preserved so mucb
of the testimony that supports it.

Just in the same manner Mr. Kyd was wil-
ling, as be said, to spare your pious ears the.
details of David's onence against bis faithful
and uuoiTendinc servant; yet what could pos-
sibly better lead us to remember the frailty
of our natu;^, and the necessity of a constant
guard upon oiir passions ? This king of Israel,
though in other respects most moral and re-
ligious, l^ad been guilty .of both adultery and
murder, with, peculiar aggravations ot trea-
chery and deceit. In this state of mind, tbe
rebuke of his wickedness in tbe height of bis
power miebt have served only to harden his
heart, ana to obstruct his I'epentance ; but
the Scripture tells us tbat it was tried by God
himself who knew it ; and Nathan was sent
to bring his crime before him in a manner
most atfecting andaddressful : apd as tbe pic-
ture of cruelty and ii\justice presented to him
seemed to apply not at all to this otherwise
virtuous man, be instantly exclaimed in tbe
native goodness of his heart, '* As the Lord
livetb that man shall die V'— tNow, I could give
no kind of credit to any maiji living wbo
sboqld tell me that he was not moved Myond
the. power of buman eloquence by the. answer
of the prophet — For my own. psurt, I have
never read it without almost exclaiming .with
emotion, Tais is sot the coKTaivAVpa pw
Mav ;r«iT ,is TOE wobd' OF GoD. — Yet tiiia
b^tttifHl]l^istory was in tl&e list efiuiiier»(f4
hy Air* Kyd fwm^the Jljiwjk,:;^ one or ^

701 J

i* pmUiihii^ <Ae " Age afRtUoii."

A, D, 17S7>

[70t

to be the work nihet of ii deikion thto of
God.

But let me abandon, for tbps sake of the sn
fument, this homage to Mr. Paine, and sup-
pose that though he gave full credit to
the pure morals of our Saviour, he neverthe-
less believed the Bible to be an infamous
book. Would it therefore follow that he
might publicly maintain it in print ? — ^This is
a proposition too large to be supported. Sup-
pose nim to have cast off with the belief of
divine revelation every, sense of moral obliga-
tion, would it folbw that he miglit do just as
he pleased, and that if he thought there was
no crime xnadultery or lewdness,, he mieht
lie with otir wives and daughters without be-
ing brought to an account f In fact intellectual
d^erenees of opinion ate res^tected^ and ^reai
latitude oo^ to be allowed to writings, whe-
ther they regard religion or government ; but
not when they are obviously intended to strike
«< Me very/oundatiotu of both, Mr. Paine has
experienced this distinction in the disregard or
rather the mbhorrence^ of those who were the
principal admirers of his latest political works
«-a fact admitted by Mr. Kyd himself, who
•ays, we should therefore allow that this work
has done some good.

Mr. Kyd has next asked how it can possi-
bly bb believed, that if God had intended an
universal revelation, it would have been com-
mitted to'the charge of ourSavfour in so hom-
blea condition, and speaking otu language
cnly, when the earth was filled with so many
distant nations and tongues whose very fcx-
istente was unknown to the Jews when Uie
Gospel wais first preached. To this it is only
iHecessary to reply, that the prophets, many
ages before this period, bv lights which could
not be human, hid established the necessity
and the truth of our Saviour's mysterious ad-
vent— had foretold even the mof t minute cir-
cumstances which should attend it, and had
proclaimed with one voice its final and tHUm-

rt progress. What besides become^ of
Kyd*s notable objection that one la^
guage only was known to the Jews^ and ae-
cordmg to him even to (Hir Saviour himbelf,
when he could confer upon his disciples
the gift of all toitgnvthat wekwheard t>r kbowa
throughout the countries wlbere thev were to
0nach,and when the Almighty had ^ectar^
m the mouths of his prophets, that the gospel
should reach to the utteriUostendsof the earth.
Not of the earth then known, though m^'s
intterpretatioDs of scripture could only ^(MUid
with their expanding knowledge, but its en •
tine circtunference, embraeing tkk ttnehlMt
empires that now exMt in it, %x theuj|ltfl(uce
of two thousand years ^— Tb redur to Mr.
Kyd's objection of one Umgtuige only; Mis not
the Bible been ali«ady translated hito tlie
Hm^ges of the most civilized and fkmerful
nations, vollecthiBtfie Meatlien oteit of dark«
jk(d» ? And is tnefife a vtmm of the lettn
knowled^ who Mfers 'himself «o doubt that
lu the inobt c6nfpr«h«DBiipe<iAehQini^ of sei4p-

turO the pfofAieoy of its univefM reeeptios
is fast fumHiag^ imid certainly muot beftiifelled.
For my ow6 pari, gentleoicii of the jury, I
have no difficulty in saying to you, not as
counsel in this cause, iid eptaking upon n^
bonotfrfor tnyaelf {and I claim to be coiiBider<«
ed as an equal autliority at least to Mr. Paine^
on the evidence which oughC to establish an^
truth), that the universal dispersion of the
Jews throughout the world, their unexampled
sufierings, and their invariably distmguishing
characteristics when compared with thehisto^
ries of all other nations and with the most an*
ciei^t predictions of their own lawgivers and
prophets concerning them, would be amply
sufficient to support the truths of the Christiao
religion if every other record or testimony
were sunk to the very bottom of the sea.*

I shall, therefore, close her6 all that I have
thought it heeessary to say in vindication of
the Bible ; and indeed I might have omitted
it altosether, if I had sooner tecollected to
remind you of a most material part of my
leaned friend's address, which had werj
nearly secaped tne.

" I BkottU bo guiky^"* he said, '< of kk^
pkmy to yoUy gentlemen ofthejury^ jf I ^jiM
iuppote you kad not aU if you rtam the bible*
It is impoitible that any of yam ehould be so ksi
to tke sense of the duty which yom ha!oe to di^
charge^ Us to come here to sit in judgment o»
the fyehdanit without that indispentabie UUaliJU
edtion:'

Now, this being his preftee to the 'whole
matter he uiges atoinst Scripture, ought I
to have beeti callea upon for any kind of re*
plyp He acknowledges that yoU have no
qiklification or iurisdiction to sit m judgment
upon the defendant, but as you have read and
believe in the Gosf^l, and as ^ou hava been
eworn in the presence of Almighty God and

• Shortly after the trial of Williams, this
solemn declaration of Mr. Ershine was cited
firom the pulpit by a kte eminent and highly
respected prelate of our church, in the fi>no#*
ingi^ords: *'We may then safely 'ooBiidie
this prophecy as an unquestionable proof «f
the divme ibiektiowtodte of -our lord,«Bd
the divme autfaoH^ of the Gospel ; mod urn
this grmittd only (were it neeeesary) we luif^
sectirely nsst the wfade idnrie uf our tuligmn.
Indeed, this remarlMble {>redicl&oa haa alwvfi
been eonsidei«d, by evert impartial pei«M,«i
one of the most powerfiu crgameDtyin favnur
of Christianity ; and in our own limus, watt
parUcularly,^a man of distinguished talents
and acknowledgi^ eminence in his profession,
wd in Uie eonstaal blibit^weighnig,^iftibg,
snldtcn^n&aiig ^denoe with the minutett
iK^dira^ in eouris of Justfase, liasfubKcly -de*
dared, that be oe^idered this propbeej, if
there we#e uuthing else to sopprntChiostiBt^
nity, as alMulety ittesietibh." 'Leclures dli
the Oospeltif St. Matthew, 4fy the right «ev.
tteilby Porteus ]X<D.*Loid Bisbdf^of^iMfdmii
Vol%ip.9it^Wth

70S] S7 GEORGE Itl. Triatqf Thomas WiOiamifor BUuphmyy [7M

in the fkce of your countr^r to administer jus- i
tice accordine to it ; yet, in almost the same
breath, he asks you to declare it, by your ver-
dict, to be false and wicked ! — I will, there-
fore, follow my learned friend no longer in an-
swer to his observations; not at all from dis-
respect to him, because he has shown great
akill and talent m a desperate case which he
was bound in professional duty to maintain;
but because I feel that I have already dis-
charged even more than the duty that was
cast upon myself, being of opinion that I
have long ago clearly established that the
book now before you, is not at all entitled to
that rational and useful protection which is
denied to the grots iUentumsness of the press,
whilst it gives kistre and value to its free-
dom.

I will conclude, therefore, with this ^neral
remark; thatifon taking the book with you
out of court you shall find, notwithstanding
all I have said to you, that it contains grave,
serious, conscientious considerations (however
erroneous) on a subject admitted to be of the
deepest importance, addressed to, and to be
answered by enlightened men ; whereby any
errors in religion, if they really have an ex-
istence might be purged and done away, I
should freely consent to an acquittal, although
the U» (^England might not ianction it : but
in a case like this, it certainly does not require
the authority of the many solemn judgments
on the subject, to establish beyond all doubt
or question that in a country whose govern-
ment and constitution rest for their very foun-
dations upon the truths of the Christian reli-
gion, a bold, impious, blasphemous and public
renunciation of them, must be ▲ higb cbimb

AMD XISDEMEAKOR.

I have only, therefore, to remind you, gen-
tlemen, that this indictment was not prefer-
red from any idea that the Christian religion
could be affected in its character or irresistible
progress, by this disgusting and contemptible
wora ; but to prevent its circulation among^st
the industrious poor, too much engaged m
the support of their families by their labour,
and too uninformed to be secure against artful
wickedness. Of all human beings they stand
most in need of the consolations of religion,
and the country has the deepest stake in their
enjoying it, not only from the protection
which it owes them, but because mo xam cam

BB EXPECTED TO BE FAITHFUL TO THE AUTHO-
BITY OF MAM WOO BEVOLTS AOAIMST THE 00-
▼EBBKEMT OF 000.

SVUMIMO VP.

Lord ITeiiyott.— Gentlemen of the Jury ;---
Being now in possession of all the facts of this
case, and convinced, in my own mind, what
conclusion ought to be drawn from them, t
am not sure that it is necessary to say any
thing at all to you upon the subject.

Gentlemen,- before you proceed to decid(
on the merits of this or any other cause, it
is proper to* sec whether the pajrties litigatbg I

stand in a fiiir light before you. I was ex-
tremely hurt, when the learned counsel for
the defendant thought fit to state to you,
with very consideralHe emphasis, and a very
determined tone of voice, that this was a
scandalous prosecution. I cannot help wish-
ing that that sentence had not been uttered.
Who commenced this prosecution, I certainly
know not But from what fell from the very
learned counsel who has just sat down, I am
inclined to suppose it proceeded from a so«
ciety of gentlemen, instituted for the most im-
portant of all purposes — for preaerving the
morals of the people — a society composed of
clergymen,. ana laymen of the most respect-
able character in the kingdom ; who, feeling
how the country is overrun with profligacy
and wickedness, whkh boldly raise their
heads in defiance of the law of the land, were
determined to see whether, . in the first place,
by admonition and advice, they could not
stop the torrent of vice and immorality ; and
secondly, if that should fail, to try what could
be done by punishment. If people with the
very best intentions carry on prosecutions
that are oppressive, the end may not always
perhaps sanctify the means. But the manner
m which this prosecution, has been conducted,
is certainly not oppressive; for, instead of
proceeding in the more expensive mode by
information, the prosecutors went before a
grand jury of the county; and it was neces*
sary to obtain the opinion of that grand jury
before the party could be put in process.

Gentlemen, we sit here in a Christian as-
sembly, to administer the laws of the land,
and I am to take my knowledge of what the
law is, from that which has besn sanctioned
by a great variety of lenl decisions. I am
bound to state to you what my predecessors
in Mr. Woolston*8 case (8 Strange, 8S4)
stated, half a century ago in this court, of
which I am an humble member, namely,
that the Christian religion is part of the law
of the land. Christianity from its earliest in-
stitution met with its opposers. Its professors
were very soon called upon to publish their
apologies for the doctrines they had em-
braced : In what manner they did that, and
whether they had the advantage of their ad*
versaries, or sunk under the superiority of
their arguments, mankind for near two thous-
and years have bad an opportunity of judging.
They have seen what Julian, Justin Martyr,
and other apologists have written, and have
been of opinion that the argument was in fa-
vour of those very publications. The world
has been lately favoured with another apo-
logv from a most learned and respectable
prelate, who calls his work ** An Apolocy for
the Christian Religion.'' I shall not oecide
between the merits of the one and the other.
The publications themselves are in the bands
of the world ; and I sincerely wish in the
concltiding language of the work lo wUch I
have just referred (I do not affect to use the
very words), I sincerely wish that the author

?05]

in fmUiiking the '< Age of Reason"

A. D. 1797.

[706

of the vrork in (juesttoo^ may beiioiiie a par-
taker of that faith in revealed religion, which
he has so grossly defamed, and may be en-
abled to make his peace wi|h God, for that
disorder which he has endeavoured, to the ut->
most of his power, to introduce inlo society.
We have heard to-<[ay, that the light of na-
ture, and the contemplation of the works of
creation are sufficient, without any other re-
velation of the Divine will. Socrates, Plato,
Xenophon, Tully — each of them in their
turns, professed they wanted other lights;
and knowing and confessinz that God was
good, they took it for granted the time would
come when he would impart a farther reve-
lation of his will to mankind. Though they
walked, as it were, through a cloud, darkly,
they hoped their posterity would almost see
God face to lace. This condition of mankind
has met with reprehension to-day. But I
shall nbt pursue this argument. I am fully
impressed with the sreat truths of religion,
which, thank God, f was taught in my early
years to believe, and which the hour of re-
flexion and inquiry, instead of producing any
doubt, has fully confirmed me in. I expected
the learned counsel for the defendant would
have differed the case of the publisher from
that of the author of this work ; that he would
have endeavoured to convince you that what-
ever ^ih might belong to the author, nothing
was imputaole to the publisher. He has,
however, to my utter surprise, exactly re-
versed the case. He tells you it was ori-
eiBally published at Paris in 1794 : that the
teelinjis of the author's friends were wounded
by this work, which I call a nefarious publi-
cation, and that it was in a great measure
forgotten; and you are now called upon to
judge of the merita or demerits of the pub-
lisher, who has brought forth a still-born
work, forgotten by every body, till he ven-
tured in defiance of the verdicts of paankind
on the author's political works, to send it forth
among the iiihamtants of this country. Unless
it was for the most mahgnant piirooses, I
cannot conceive how it was pnblishea. It is
however for you to judge of it, and to do jus-
tice between the public and the defendant.

The Jury instantly found the defendant
— Guilty.

Lord Kenyan, — I have observed several
persons, very likely from curiosity, taking
notes of what passed here. This publication
is so shocking, that I'hope nobody wilt pub-
lish thiss I mean that a general detail of it
will not make any part of that publication.
Nobody who has any* regard to decency : no-
body who has any regard to their own interest
:will eddeavotir to disseminate this publication '
by publishing what has passed to-day.

November 27th, 1797.

The Honoumble Tfmmt Enkine,
VOL. XXVL

—•My

lord ; — ^In this case of Ihe king against Tlmmas
Williams, I am to move your lordsliips fur
judgment

Court.' -We shall not give judgment In that
case to-day . it must stand over.

The Honourable Tttomas Erskinem — My
lords, that being the case, your lordships
thinking it not fit to pronounce judgment to-
^^y^ you will pardon me if I think it neces-
sary to say a few words to explain why the
defendant, upon so very important a convic-
tion as that which exists in the present in*
stance, should not have been brought up
sooner to receive judgment of the Court ; and
why be appears at so late a period of the term
before your lordships.

My lords, with respect to the prosecution,
I felt it at the moment of the trial as I feel it
now, of infinite importance to tiie public;
and there is no transaction of ray humble
life, my lords, that I look back upon with
such heart- felt satisfaction as the share I had
in being instrumental in protecting the inter-
ests of religion and. morals, which, most un-
questionably, are the foundation, not only of
all subordination to the government of a coun-
try, but to all the interests of civil society in
all parts of the world.

My lords, a considerable length of time has
elapsed since the conviction ot the defendant
took place ; and, though it is difficult to tell
a nation by the head, yet as far as I have
been able to collect the sentiments of the
public, I believe no proceeding that ever took
place, in this or an^ other court, bas^ivca
more general satisfaction than this conviction
has done. I make use of the word *' general,'^
because most undoubtedly the satisfaction has
not been universal ; the exception I am about
to state accounts for, and is the reason why
I present myself in this part of the term, and
I think it my duty not to insist upon your
lordships doing that which but for a very ex^
traordinary interposition, it would have been
of course for your lordships to do.

Subsequent to the conviction of the de-
fendant, he wrote to me a verjr proper letter,
and lie intreated my interposition with the
prosecutors, doing justice to the principles
upon which they proceed, and conceiving, as
he' very justly conceives, that his prosecutors
were honourable and humane persons, and
believing, as I know it is, that the prosecu-
tion is fSingfle- minded, and proceeding from the
Eurest and most honourable motives. In that
esets forth, unaffectedly, his deep regret and
sorrow for having been guilty of the ofTcnrc
for which he was convicted, and stating his
family to be under the pressure of considerable
distress, so that I thought it not at all beneath
me to relieve him, so far as to tell him I
would lay his case before the prosecutors, us
he had represented it to me. I intended to
do it at an earlier period, but I had not an
opportunity ; it was, therefore, my inteniion^
without presenting him before your lordships
to-day, to have moved to let the defendant

707]

37 GBaRAEHIL Trifd^n^mulTiaAmtJirmkffpkemy, [70t

«liiid OYer upon his own t^eognliaiice, and
to recferve the judgment luitil he had au op-
portuDity of making his own applicaticm to
Ihc prosecutors? hut, my lords, to my utter
astonishment, I fouAd the prosecutors were
put into a situation ^hich involved not only
their character, butwhieb, if not noticed in
due season, in a proper manner, it may be
said iavolved the kw, religion, morality and
justice of the coimtry ; and whi<Jh might have
been at stake: For, whHst the defendant was
conducting himself with this submission and
humility, which rendered him an object of
clemency, his attorney, who owed him the
most dutifiil and attentive service, and whtf
was bound to maintain the interest and safety
^ his client, thought fit, in the most public
manner, in the Court of Common Pleas, to
call upon the attorney for the prosecution
for his determination ; and to say. We dwrst
not bring him (the Defendant) up for judg-
nieiit; and he has endeavoured to prevent
ilia making that submission to' the auUiority
of the Court, but which he has, however^ vo-
luntarily done.

Mr. Martin • has thought fit not merely to
dispute your lordship's jurisdiction, but, as I
' understand, has circulated, throughout every
part of the country he was able, a printed defa-
ination of the jury; the Court, ana its proceed-
ings. As to myself, I will say nothing, for
I am rto magistrate;. and, if I have been
guilty ofany thin^ improper, my character, of
course, most sink m proportion ; if i slni right,
I freely forgive >Mr. Martin every thing that
related to me, but I dare say, at the time he
composed that libel, he did not just recollect
the share I had in defending' hi»life;f

My iorcls, when I found: this I must neces-
sarily suppose the defendant was a party to
this defathatory libel, and that- there was an
influence practised upon him to prevent his
submission to the authority of the court ; arid,
when I found that audacious defiance hM
out to the prosecutors, and to us, as the per-
sons entrusted with it, he therefore received
notice to stand, here to day. But, subsequent
to thatthne, it-appears that th&defendant is
DO party to it, as he will infonn your iovdships
and has declared to. me ; but that he conti-
nues in that proper spiritof submission ^hieh
induced him originally to^make his represen-
tation to me, and' has a reverence for the l»w
and its authority, but that his attorney has
endeavoured to Infuse into him ^'disregard to
both. That he stands bowing with snbmis-
aion to the verdict of the jury which has been
pronounced against him.

In consequence of that, having had notice
to come up so tery lately it is scarcely witJiin,
perhapsj therutes ftf the court to ask fbr judg-
ment against' him. Such, my lords, is the
*' .■■-..■■■.-. ^ .

* See what has been said eoncerntng this
person, in ^noie^anti, pjOri. .

t T'his refers to ithe: proceedings lai^inst
J^Iailin for high Ueaton^vTO-the year ms. ,

case ef the unbappgr naa before you : arid, tit
being so, I have tatken it upon myself, and. Ido
take ttupon myself, ascounsel for the prosectt-
lion,:to entreat of the Court that ne may
stand upon his bail till the fourth day of neott
termythat hctnay havean opportnnitj of jpn^
seatmg himself to the court, :aod stating also,
I hope, by his. counsel, all ]i>atlers:that.may
aerve. him- when be stands for judgment; >aa
it would be cruel condude him in conse<|uence
of the wicked representatione of his attoiaejEy
who so improperly represents >4Mii,f«nd vtho
has in vain tried to seduoe riiim from lus
duty -and the pursuit of his true mtereat.

Myi toilis,' Lam not at present: possessed of
the proof of Mr.' Martinis being* the pubHsfaec;
or author,' but as'Soomas lasuposseased of the
•roof of his. being the pablisher or author- of
that letter, I shall oerkainly applyto the coufil
to remove him foom the roll.

Qnirew— rAt preseat the )dcfisBdant must
continue upon his recograzarnce. ' W hen . lie
tomes up he will produce the :he8t proofs he
can in mitigation.

It is impossible for uato' enter into that M
present, but it will have its.proper efiecU

The Honourable T/umiM J5rsi(rnie^— I hope
your lordships think I have not dane jmpn>-
perly.

Court — Certainly not, sir.

Mr. 'MctrM.— «-Oentlenipn,(duriag the last
five years I have been constanliy in a state, to
-be called upon by some one tir.otber*

' Covrf .—^There is no » cause of y odrs!befiiie
the Court. Ifyausfaoukftaiddress. the /Court,
you 'Would »meit probal^ ^egin : either .by
avowing or denying the pamphlet. We cannot
hear you.

Mr. Martm.'^Ijet ^Mr. Erikiae nuke -lus
•motion whenever he pieases^ il am toady rto
meet -him.

•»■

February 5<A, il9^.

The Honourable /iVknmu d3riJkwis.-«My
ford, I now move -for the |ad|nnentof:2lhe
Court in: the case tof Thomas 'Wiliianis.

.Loit) iCcaymik— /This > was .an indictment
against Thomas Williams for publishing a
book, called the "Age of Reason,'' &c.

. [Hi.s lordship here read the report of 4he
evidence given on the part of the prose-
cutjonj

The parts of the beak that were lobnged aA

bein^ biasphemoua and impious werei ceadsat

• the) trial, but they are so oileosiv^ .to : rel igion

•aix] :good order,'.tbat J - suppeae siobady ' will

iwifth to havo them read now.

.The next circumataoee is, that on .the ipart
of the .defendantia notice .v«as;gtven to the
prosecutor to produce at the trial of the cause
a book called thelMble.

On the part. of the. defendant -no witnesses

were callea ; but his counsel «aid the charge

v«iis-4ni{iiDperly'.4nnmgb>, and tluit itfintasa

WD

inftMkltingrfki^ » Agi*^R4a$an%*

As D. mi^

[710

liglit which 9mtf' iMMF Ind (whicb< thry

\jMTd Keoi'QQL here stated, the diJSerenf
points of Hn C^kI*s argymeat sU the
trial.]

VpMi* f«fl«etUip ufMm my- conduct diiiing>
fhe trial, I Haiw reason to aecute mrfielf ot^
knpropfereoiiddbtt for permitting • such' argu«>
siealS to he used. For, if I retnembtr the
conduct of the Cbiirt> in causes -of thisnaturav
I shottM have remewibcred thC'Opmion of the
^olfr court i« th« case ofaheKiagand Wool*
alon, m^ soeoitd^ dtimnge- 8J^ The Court
would not endure, wouul not suffer any* thing'
to be said agaiasttHc eeiablished religion of
Ihe caoBtiy.

Thoovdcnr'aiid^dbcoruni ofitheoourt, which
has bean obser^d in- almost every instance
through my Ibng* profesHional hfe,. IniS been
guarded' against any thins of that'kiiid*: it
naa been protected by^the decorum of the -bar.
Itie irapo«abie*fnr tbeCourt- to-ftireseewhen
n sentencv begins* hoir it will end, and, some-
tMirae» mieehief ia diNxe before' we are sure
that the sentence will conclude in an offen-
sive manner. I must say this, to sHoar that
t ought not to have suffered what was spoken
«poD the trial it> some'partS' of the defence.

I am sorry to say thai the orosectition,
wlMoh WHS carried on with all tne liberality
passible, was in plain terms broadly slated to
Ihejury to be ** a scandalous, prosecution; ^ f
dM express what appeared to mo, and left
it to Ihe iory whet berthoso opprobrious terms
belonged to tlie prosecution ; I think it is
pretty apparent thejury thought as 1 did; he
was nmnd Guilty^.

(The affidavit of Thomas Williams read.]

^ Thomas Williams of little T^wnstile,
Holborn, in the county of Middlesen,
bookseller, the above named de/bndant^
naketh oath and raitb, that he hath aU
ways understood and verily believes that
the pamphlet called tAe Ag€ of JUta&n
was first published in London some time
in or about the beginnios of the year
1794, and was pubncty sold by several
boeksellefs there, and went through se-
veral editions ; and that no prdseciition
as far as this deponent has been able to
learn) was^ber Instituted or threatened
against any person for selling the said
pempblet tift he was himself prosecuted
ror the same. And this deponent fur-
ther saith that as he had not heai^ that
any snob proseention had been instituted
or threatened against any person what^
e^r, he was not aware that by selling
thesak) work he was oommitting an of-
fence against the laws of his country •
nor had he any inlention thereby to in-
sult or Tilify the-established religion, but
eonndered the work merely as a book of
controversy, in which lignt he was the
Mlhcr M to eottsider it frm its having

Ueeirthoaglit worthy of ait answer not
only by the learned bishop of. Landaif, as'
thisc deponent has been informed andve-
rily believes, but by several otherpersonS'
of established reputation in the karnedi
world. And' this deponent further saith,
that since his oonvtctton be has- not sold
or given away or in any manner disposed'
of a single copy of the said* pamphlet,
called the Age ^ Reawn^ nor does he
know or believe thai a single copy
thereof has been sold or given away or
in any manner disposed 'of by any person
of this* family, or any person whatsoever
under his influence or control ^ nor is it
his intenttonp ever to sell or give away or
in any manner to publish the said work
agaiut And this deponent further saith
thatithottgh, since his conviction, be baa
endeavoured so to demean himself as
to slitisfy the prosecutors and the Court
that he had no malevolent- intention in
selling the said- work ; and thait so far at
the oonduot of bis late attorney may
haveteadod to counteract the effect «>f
such endeavour, this deponent> saith it
has been without his. approbation and di-
rectly in opposition to tiis wish, and' that
so far from this deponent^ having united
with his late attorney in holding the
court or prosecutors at defiance^ he^ wa9
totally ignorant of that fmrt of his said
late attorney's conduct till within two
days of the time when he was brought
into court last term, and ho saith that
not only had his late attorney in such
conduct acted without oommunicatk>a
with this deponent, but that this depo-
nent highly disapproved of such conduct^
not only on acoountof its dangerous ten-
dency as to himself personally, but from a
conviction of the gross impropriety of it
with respect to the public and the law.
And this deponent further saith, that his
late attorney finding himself, as this de«

Eonent verily believes, disappointed ill
is endeavour to unite this deponent
with himself in holding the Court and
the prosecutors at defiance^ he becamo
this deponent's personal enemv ; and, as
this dapoiMnt is informed and believes;
aocvsea the counsel for the proseoutH>il
of conspiring with this deponent's coun«>
sel and this deponent himself, to elude
the justice of the country, and assumed
a merit to himself in having counteracted
that conspiracy. And this deponent fur-
ther saith that ha has a wire and two
children, the eldest of which is about fivo
years old and the youngest five month^,
whose support depends entirely on this
deponent's labour, and who will be re^
duced to great distress should this ho^
nourable' court be induced to pass aheavt
sentence on this deponent.

«• TnoMiLS Williams.*
Sworn 9rd Ftbruary ir98| in Court.

711] 57 GI^ORGE IIL Trial qf Thomat mBiams/ar Bla^hm^, . [712

. Mr. Kyd^My lord ; I think I shall besi
discharge my duty to my client^ by satisfying
myself with statios that I can bear personia
testimony of his bavins conducted himself
in the roaoner stated in his affidavit

The Honourable Thomas Erskine.^^My
lords; The circumstances attending this
case are so exceedingly peculiar, and theisub-'
ject of it, is so deeply connected with the pub-
lic interest, that before the Court pronounces
its judgment, I conceive it my duty to make a
very few observations to your lordships.

My lords, it is true that this work had
been published, and had been in circulation
for a considerable length of time before
tlie publication by the defendant; but,
my lord, that circulation at last became
so very extensive, and, from the quar-
ters in which it wus pushed, became, at the
aame time, so extremely pernicious and dan-
gerous to the public, that the prosecutors
thought it a duty they owed to bring it before
jrour lordship, and a jury of this court.

My lords, the jury was a respectable one,
and I believe found no difficulty in coming to
the judgment they pronounced. Certain^ it
is true, and I owe it, most undoubtedly in jus-
tice to the person who now stands upon the
floor, to state, that I received from hiro, very
soon after his conviction, a letter stating his
contrition for the offi^nce he had committed,
and stating he was desirous of making every
atonement in his power^o the laws of his
country, which he had offended, and to which
, he was ready to submit I certainly thought
it my duty to lay that case before the prose-
tutors for their consideration ; but, before I
had any opportunity of consulting with them
upon the case of so much moment to the pub-
lic, your lordship will easily judge of my
surprise to find, that my conduct (which, in-
deed was of no consequence), bnt that the
conduct of the Court, and the conduct of the
Jurv, had been armigned in the public prints ;
and it was supposed a sort of revolution had
taken place in thq jurisprudence of the coun-
try to aOfect the defendant That the Court,
the counsel, and the Jury, had united to
attack the liberty of the press, as acknow-
ledged by the law of England ; and that the
Court, instead of doing its duty, had led the
yf&y to pronouncing an unjust verdict. My
lordSj it is very difficult to sepai:ate the per-
son who stands for judgment, and the person
ivho chooses to defend him in court ; I there-
fore, supposed, when it was published, that
l^e consented to the slander contained in that
letter against the administration of justice;
and I instantly brought him up for the judg-
ment of the Court in the former term, but J
Jearnt that he was no party to the work, and
that he wholly dissented from it; and,
therefore, I did not then press for the judg-
juent. I mention this circumstance to show
why it is that, the defendant at so l»te a time
from the cmu'iction stands before the Court to
reccivejudgmentt

My lordfl, it was weUobaerved by an M»
and excellent person, whose loss we all de«
plore in the court, and shall long continue to
deplore, I mean the late worthy and learned
Mr. Lee, that the empire of folly is very ex-
tensive ; and it is therefore not very difficult
for men of the meanest ability to abuse per-
sons whose situations do not enable them to
form accurate judgments of things : I think
that obtervalion will apply, in some respects,
to the case now before your lordships.

My lords, this prosecution has been so
mueh arraigned in different quarters,- it ia
therefore 1 make the few observations 1 am
about to make.

It has been said, that the law of England
knows no right to suppress a book ; ana that
this is an attempt to suppress a book. Mr
lords, the judgment which I ask of your lor<^*
ships to pronounce to-day, founded upon a
verdict, which the jury pronounced upon the
trial, suppresses no book : the law of England
acknowledges no licenser, neither before nor
after publiqation. It should be known and
understood, that after judgment, this book is
as open to publication as it was before; but,
let him that publishes it, remember tliat he
trespasses a^nst the law of the land, which
now gives him notice that it will be subject
to the determination of a court of law here-
after. If he can show that any of the argu-
ments that fell from the counsel at the bar
were not proper, but misled the juiy : if any
thing that fell from your lordship was incoi^
sistent with the rules of law, and contrary to
that duty you owe the country : if any testi«
mony was given contrary to the rules of evi.
dence : if tue jury were mistaken, or as it has
been said, were perjured: if any thing was
done at the trial of this cause, inconsistent
with the due and wholesome administration of
justice : If any of those thin^ have been dis-
covered, and the public nund has become
more enlightened than it wasi at the time of
giving this verdict, your lordships know that
the ailments which led to the judgment
given, can never be given in evidence against
any English subject that may publish this
book: tne public are tlierefore secure on ail
sides, as. the law expresses it, shall be se-
cured ; but, let it be known the law has not
been infringed upon, and that the defendant
is answerable to the judgment wliich your
lordships shall pronounce.

My lords, I certainly am bound, as &r as I
know any thing of the matter personally, to
state that I know the defendant's affidavit,
which your lordships have heard read, to be
true, and to give testimony of its truth. He
was told by his late attorney, that he had no-
thing to fear in this case : th^t the Court dare
not punis^ him ; that he had only to como
and walk through it, and to defy your lord*
ships to punish him : and it is equally true,
that when he .founds as he sti^tes in bis affi*
davit, that be was deceived and misled, he
did wbat b«.»Wf9 bf dli to icooocile bifnidf

713]

in^pMtiking (ht '< Agt afBioion:*

A. D. 1797.

L7U

lo hit prosecutors ; aod by reftning to follow
the pernicioua advice of his attorQey, that at>'
tomey became bU peraonal eoemy.

My lords, of him I can now say nothing ;
for, my ioids, the grave which swallows up
every thing, has disappointed aU comment
upon that unfortunate man. He died soon
alter the last term.

My lords, I thought it my duty to mention
these circumstances, because I know that the
ofience of which the defendant stands con-
victed, is so enormous in its nature, that it
requires the consideration of the Court. I
know, if the defendant stood before your
lordships, without any circumstances of miti-

Eition, without any atonement to the insuhed
ws of his counUry, I know your lordships
would be bound by the oaths you have taken,
to pronounce upon him a most serious and
severe judgment; and^ therefore, recollect-
ing this prosecution was brought to vindicate
the honour and character ot.the Christian
rdigion, I thought I oueed it to the prisoner
sot to forget the chanty which it so very pe-
culiarly inculcates^*

* Between this day, and the day of passing
sentence, circumstances took place which are
narrated in the foUowinfi; statement:

*' At a meeting c»f the Procx^mation So-
ciety at the Bissop of LoMDON*s,on the 27th
of February, 1798:

** Prewn*;— The Bishop of London
[Port^s] P. in the chair.

«(

*^ General Sib Georos OsaoBNEy Bart.
•* Mr. Freeman.
" Mr. & SxiTB.

" Mr. WiLBERFORCE, V. P.

** The BiSBOP of Durham, {Barringian].
*' Lord WiLLovoHBY OR Broke.

'' Mr. BOWDLER.

- *' Sir A. Edmomstone, Bart.

** Sir J. Andrews, Bart
' " Mr. Martin.

" The Bishop of St. Asaph, IBagot,"}

" Mr. Bbbnard.

" Mr. Way.

*' Mr. Grant.

*' Sir William Dolbek, Bart

" The following Resolutions were agreed to:

** The secretary reported that Mr. Erskioe
<' had intimated to him an opinion, that when
*' the defendant Williams was brought into
** court to receive final judgment, the society
f would- have a proper opportunity of mani-
*' festiog their onarity, ana christian forbear-
*' ance, by instructing their counsel to state,
** that they were satisfied with the punish*
^ ment already inflicted on Williams by his
** commitment to Newjgate. Ai^er a full con-
^ sideration of the subject

** RssuLVED, unanmouifyf That as, on the
^ one hand, the Society do not wish to press
^ for severe judgment on theoffender,and as,
*^ on the other nand, they do not feel tbem-
*^ dAyes, justified ia expressipg a wish for

Lord Keny(»u^Lei him stand committed
now to Newgate, aod be brought up the fourth
day of next term to receive judgmeAt

April «8fA, 1798.

Mr. Justice ilaAAtinf.— Thomas Williams,
you have been tried and found guUty of pub-
lishing a most heinous and blasphemous libel,
both upon the Old and New Testament, tend-
ing to sap the foundation of our holy rejigiixn ;
to traduce it, and to represent the ti^and
history of our blessed Saviour, as a most in* -
credible tale. You luive, likewise, introduced
into this libel certain blasphemies against
Almighty God himself, which the most im«
pious and diabolical mind could imagine it
was in the heart of man to write ; I lorbear
to go into the particulars, as they ought to be
consigned to eternal oblivion. Although the
Almifthty does notstand in need of the feeble-
aid of mortids to vindicate, his honour and
law, it is nevertheless highly fit that courts-

of judicature should show their abhorrence

■ ■ ■ •-^^•"•^ ■■■■—■..II I - p» .i.^.,.,

'Menity, they desire the secretary to inform.
'' Mr. Erskine of their unanimous determi«<
** nation to leave the judgment entirely with.
" the Court."

And at a subsequent meeting which was
held at the bishop of Durham's on the report
of the secretary, that he had waited on Mr.
Erskine with a copy of the above minutes,,
and that Mr. Erskine declined being farther.
concerned for the Society, and bad returned,
their retainer,

" It was raolved. That the secretary should
''communicate to the Socie^'s remaining
'' counsel, previouslv to Willianis*s receiving
'' the judgment of the Court, the unanimooa
'* determination of the numerous meeting
<' held at the bishop of London's on the 87 th
<' of February last, together with such other
'* particulars as may be necessary for their
« complete information.''

A statement of the circumstances which
induced lord Erskine to decline proceeding
any farther in this case, has been communi-
cated to me by him, in reply to an application
for information on the subject. With his
permission it is here inserted.

'< Buchan Hill Farm^
** February 7M, 1819.
'' Dear Sir; — ^You are well justified in re*
" quiring to know, &/Ay, in the case of tlie
'' King againU Williams, for publishing Tbo.-
'* mas Paine's Age of Reason, after receiving
" and acting under a general retainer, and
*' convicting the de/endant, I had not only
*' refused to pray judgment against biro, but
" had cancelled the retainer altogether. The
*' inviolable obligation of retainers according
<' to the rules of the profession, regarding
*' them, is of immense importance to the pub-.
''Uciftpd in the British State Trials, cvory

J

7151

U

€1

ittfo^ eto tibrldf mcU iAfimiouftt and< wii^keii
books. Indeed; all offeiiees'ofi tilii' kliid>ar«!

** thing should be fbQWf; wlTich conoects itself
" with the liberty and security of the people
^' in our courts of justice, which essentially
** dtfpctoid Upton %bteantegnty«ad hid^ndente
** ofifht^ baiv

<* £( belicfve no> mwnber of the professioa
'^ liid^ever< the occamon of nfftiiftetinginicnre'
" tfifOHgty thaw m^lfyhw seme of the tfub«
^* jeetfs #ight U'thooflehis cvm couostl.aigKinst
**^ AlPpower OP iirflueiice in tkie seald ajndMt
** hktt. When- Anorney General to thePrince
*^of Wales (now Prlnc(» Regent): I wm ve-
^ Mined by TBOftAisrPAnnv iki person; tode«
^ fend him on his approaching Urial for pob-
'* lishirig thus Seeiond PvOo^ ins ' Ii%ht»of
^'^ ' Maii>' but i% WttB soon iiititiialed tome by
** high autborityy Ihai \t was oofisidenBd: to be
^ ificooip&tlble w^th my situation^ and the
" Prince^ faitnseH', in the most frtendiy maniie»
aequaiMed tatf that if wm highly displtas*
ing fo the King, add that i ought to end^a*-
vour to eicplain my conduct, which I irome-
diately did in a tetter to his majethf Mmm^;
in which, After eirpr^ssing my sincere at-
*<' tachment tb hift person, and'te the cOBst4tu-
^ tion of the kineoom, attacked in the'work
" which i^a» to be defended', I took the lu
** berty ta cladm as an invaluable part of that'
^ Tery coAstituliron, the nn<|utt^nable light
** of the subject to make bis defence, by any
*• counsel of hit aa}nfre& choice, if noipreoi^
'' (Htt/y tetninedf or ongetged from office by the
*^ crown, and that there was no other way of
** dieciding, whether that wa«, or was net my
^ own sitofttiof) as Attorney General to the
^ Prindtf, than b^ reibrring recording to ens.
^tom, that qtiesttfon to the bar, which I was
^ perfectly willing, and even desirous to cb.
^ In a f^w days afterwards, I received, ttirengh
^' my friend the late admiral Paine, a most
^* ^racioQs message* from the Prince, express-
'< mg his deep regret in feeling himself oUfged
^ to seoeive n^y resignation, which was ac-
^ cordiagjy sent. But I owe it to hla Royal
^ Higbnessyto express my opinion, that cir-
** camstaaced as he. was, he had no other
^ eoufse to take in those disgraceful and dis-
*' gusting times, aad that mj retainer for
** Paine, was made a pretext ny the king's
'^ ministers lor my removal, because my wor*
** thy and exceHeiit fiiend, sir Arthur Piggott,
^ was removed from the office of the Prince's
^ Soltdtor General, at the very same moment,
^ although he had nothing whatever to do
^ with Blr. Patae, or his book. The feet Is,
*^ that we were both, I believe, at that time,
** members of a 'society for the reform of
* parliament^ cdled the « FViands af the
« « People.' '^

^ It would; however, be most uirjust as well
^ as ungrateful tb tfte Prince Reetf qt, not to
^ add that in a few y^ears aftetwarSi, his royal
^ iiig|ia(e89| ^-^ own- mereifMCum, wnt ibr

hMionly^cdfeiwat to God) bnt eriroet>neaMbs¥
the laaftof «lia> land^and* are pnnishaWt! as<
such; inasna]diiast)bi9rtaad^tb^dte«troy ttietof

u.

C(

it

u
<«
u
ii

a
tc
u
tt
u

M

Ct
it
t.
tt
tt
tt
((

u
u
tt
tt
ti
tt
tt
tt
tt

K«***^»a^k«

i^****^-**^-A. « til IX «<«

tt

ti

tt
tt
tt

it

u
tt
tt
tt
tt
tt
a
ti
it
u

M
it
(«
ii

ti

ti

n

it
u

Bie ta Carlton Uouse;.whiUt)h^was still, iot
bed 'Under a soirere illnesp, and,, taking, mei
BBOst^grtkcidaslyi by: tha. hand, sakl tb< niai
that though he was not. at all qualified toi
jiidgBiof HatiiinerB, nor to appieciate- the
correctMaa on iaoerreotiieBs of my oondoeV
io>Ule:id8taMe;that hadj separated us) yet
tfaattbeto|^a>BMriBoed'I> had. acted froin:tiie
purest maiives, .he wished most jaiblidjn to
aianifiBStthat) dpiniaii,ajid! therefore direeta*
ad ma ton^inMncdiateW.taSomersetlibiisa^
and to brmg with aae wr hia exeeuticoi thv
patent of chanceliar to, his^ royal, highnetsy
which he said' he. had alwaya deagned for
me: adding, that awina toi my bciag tom
young w&n has astablisliraaiU waa first
fixed, be had declinad/havin^ a chaacelion
aAi that time, tliat . daring our sepaiation ha
had been more than once asked to revive it^
which he had refiised .tiado, looking forwafd
to this occasion, and I acaavdingly held thv
-revived office efchaneellor to the Prinee ef
Wales > until li was ap|iointtd chancellor to
the Ring, when I resigned it in conformity
with the only precedent in the reconls of
the duchy of Cornwall ; vis. that of lord
Bacon, who- waa chancellor to Htnryy
Prince of Wales, and whose resignatiba la
there recorded, because of his acceptance of
the Great Seal, in the neign of king James
the First.

'< I have troabkd yoa-anth this short his-
tory fort Arcc reoiosf;
<* First, To show that I do notthink %^/^
of Retainers.

•^ Sacoadty, because the memory of aets
that are hiahly hoooarable in men who are
called to the government of nationa^ is not
only justice t» them but useful tO' be trea-
sured up in the mmda of a people.
'* Thirdly, because it may remind some who
are but too apt to think- that unprincipled
suUeroiency is the surest road to preferment,
that Aoaci^^ i$ the bett policy ; since when
the ereat seal was afterwarib vacant, his
royal highness, in conjunction with my re-
vered fiiend Chaclea Fox, considered my
succession as indispensable in the formation
of the new administiatioci, presented md
with a seal with my initial and a coronet
engraved ;on it, and dcsiied me to take lUs-^
tormel' castle as the designation of my title;
as belonging to the dnch^ of Cornwall, and
the seat of the nost ancieiit dukes of Cora-
wall.

'' Having convicted Williams as will appear
by V9UV report of hia trial, aad before hd
hadi notice to attend tha^ ooiir I to receiva
jiidgntent^ I happened to -pass one day
thfough the old Turnstile from Holborn, in
my way to lineoln'a Ion Fields, when in
the narrowest part of it, I folt sometlling
putting me^ by thp'eoat^ whan ob .tnroin j^

411 pMMingJtiu << Agtrf^lLmon:'

7r7i

gethtr; and it is upon this ground tlMt the
Cforistitn reliaion constitutes part of the lam
«f £n|g)and \ but that law, without the means
•f enforcing its: precepts, woold be bnt a dead
letter: Whenever those infiunouswovkstap-

^ ■ ■ ' ■■' I ' 1 1 1 ■ I I ■

^ round, I saw a woman at my feet, Ibathed
^ in teass and emaciated with disease and
f* soirow, who continued almost to drag me
*.* inta« roiserable-hovel in the passage, nmere
'' I found she was attending upon two or
^^ three ' unhappy children 4n the confluent
** 8nmll*pox, and in the same apartment, not
'* aibeveteatnrtwelfe feet square, the wretched
^ man I had convicted was sewings up liitk
** nligiauM tracts which had been his prtnci-
<*;pal emploj^ment'in his trade, and I ^was
'''fully comrinced that his poverty and not
'' his will had led to .the puolication of this
f* iafanious book, as without any kind of a^
^ palationfor mercy on my part, heveluntarify
" jmd eagerly en|aged to And out aU> the co-
** pies in circulation, and to bring them to me
^* to be destroyed.

' ** I'Was most deeply affected with what I
'' had seen, .and feebngthe strongest irapres-
" sion that it offered a happy opportunity to
the prosecutors of vindicating and rendering
nniversalfy popular the cause in which they
" had succeeded, I wrote my opinion. to that
elfect, observing (if I well remember) that
mercy being the grand charac;teristic of the ;
'*' Christian religion which had been defamed
'*' and insulted, it might be here exercised not
j" onlv safely, but more usefullv to the object
y of the prosecution,, than by the most. severe
*' judgment whichr must be attended with the
'^ ruin of this helpless family.

** My advice, was most respectful! v received
'*' by the Society, and I have no doubt ho-
^'.nestly- rriccteg, because that jnaost excellent
"^< prelate, bishop Porleus and many .other
> honourable persons. concurred in rejecting
^' it ; but I had still a duty of my own to per-
'^'form, considering myself not as counsel for
.** the Society, but Tor the Crown. If I had
^ been engaged for all or. any of the indivi-
'«f duals compodng it, .prosecutipg by indict-
^\ ment for any pertonal tn/'t/r^ punishal}le by
'** indictment, and had convicteQi a defendant,
*** I must have implicit^ A)l!owed my instruc-
'Mions, boweverinconsistent with my own
'* ideas of humanitj^ or moderation, l)ecause
<< every man who is injured has a clear right
'' to demand the highest penalty which the
" law will inflict ; but in the present instance
^ I was in fact not retained at all, but respon-
'' sible to the crown for my conduct. Such a
'' voluntary Society, however respectable or
** useful, having received no injury, could not
'' erect itself into a cmtos morum, and claim a
'' right to dictate to counsel who had con-
*' sented to be employed on the part of the
^ king for the ends of iustice only.

*' The bar, indeed, had, in my own expe-
** rience, rejected a retainer of that-«noma-

iA. D. 1797.

[718

*4i

fiear thegr art the proper subjects «£ i|ftoseai«-
tion ; for if the name of our Acdeemer msn
•soiferedrlo be traduced, and'hieboly reiidon
treated with contempt, the soleo^ty^rran
oath, on which -the due administration of
justice depends, would be destmyed, and the
law be stripped of one of iti principal seno-

'Mous- description. Lord Stopfi^rd, an offioor
*' in the first regiment of Guards being oa
<< guard at the. palace on. the kingVs.birtbrdav,
** having thought it his duty to nsmovej^b-
** structions, and having laid hold of a gtntk^
'^mao in the.throng, had an action broiight
'':agaiDst him; andthe regimeiit, .appraviqe
<' or 'his conduct, having resolved to .defend
^< him at their own expense, which they ba4
<' a dear rightto do, directed :me to be rj^tain-
^ ed.to defend him,.but the late Mr. XAwteo
** their solicitor, instead of entering 'the to-
'< Xaimet for lard Stopford, entered it 'for the
<' first regiment of Guards, Mid Ibe .duke „<if
^* York, as their colonel,- afieffwards. coosUi ted
*'with me on the sutfject; but .befere the
^ trial, the plaintiff came in porson .to niy
*' chambers,. with. his. attorney to rttttin .me,
** and being informed I was retained tfKaina^
'' htm, desired to inspect fny letaioer tDiooky
*^ when seeing no other s-etamer than far. ike
^^ FwMt RefiamttofQmardBt'\A%iMioitnt^jQbr
** jecled to itsiobligation, and requested, me .to
'< leave it as usual to the decision of the -bar,
^* who considering it oiino retainer;! nokSjob'-
'< liged/ to- receive that lof the plaid tiff,tanda^
'^ terwards as his* counsel obtasDed-Aiverdiot
^ against lord Stopford in WestmiMter Hall.

«* Upon the present oecasion, rtkerefore, :I
'< made. up my mind to act for .myself, 'and
^' not only not, to piay judgment, but.taoan-
** eel the .irregular retainer •Altoe^her, by
** striking itrout of my •hook, ;apd judgment
** beinealterwacds prayedbyaaothertCQunse),
<« tko-defendant^-aamusthave bocaje^fttctedy
<< W3S< sentenced 'to ; a .seveoe drnprisooment,
'^ but Jtfr.Perry .to Jiis piBat honour <Cxerting
" himself for the*protettion of bis Mjpleia £a-
^' mily, raised a-oonsideiable sum m><monc^v
**. fbr.tbeir support^witfaeat > jrhioh Ihey anust
'< have perished.

■> **- W hetber Iwms right or wrong ; I wiil oiot
-^'uddefftake ta«ay ;'but I am mast decidedly
**• of opinion tbat if JDy, advice bpd b^en fol-
^< lowed) add thesepentant pjnblisherhad been
** made the willing instrument of stigmatizing
** and suppressing what he had published,
^ Pai ne's Age ofReason would never again have
*< been printed in England, whereas I have
** been informed that it has since been again
** in circulation, and that a prosecution by the
" attorney general is now pending for its sup-
« pression ; of the merits of which, however,
'* or of the guilt or innocence of the person ac-
<< cused, I am wholly ignorant, and can only
*' wish that justice may oe done. ^

** I have the honour to be, with great re-
^'gard, your faithful humble servant,

'* T. J. Howell, e8C[. Ersxihe.'^

?193 37 GEORGE III. Tnal of Thomas WUUanuJnr Blasphmj/. [780

<ioas» the >dr^ of future pufibfaments. It
highly then behoves those who are vested with
authority to protect our holy religion, to per^
severe to protect it, and to* punish those who
are guilty of such ofiencfis. I cannot, help
adding, that the crime is farther aggravated
by the motive in which it was conceived, as
there can be no temptation for it ; there can
be no hope of gain, nor any sudden impulse
of passion, to which niau is so often exposed
by the frailty of his nature : but it could have
proceeded merely from a cool and malignant
spirit.

1 must now make an observation or two
upon the affidavit yon have made. You state
that the pamphlet which is the object of this
proseaition was first published in the year
1794> and w^ publicly sold by several book-
sellers : this is, in effect, saying that because
there are many men as wicked as yourseff,
you ought not to be punished : For my own
part, I draw a direct contrary inference ; for,
if there are many who are so much more
wicked than the others, as to publish so atro-
cious a lihel, it seems to me proper, that a
severe example should be made; and it is a
pity it had not been done sooner. You farther

Id,

add, that you were not aware you were com-
luitting an- offence against the law, or had
any intention to detract from or vilify the es-
tablished religion: Can any man who calls
Jhimself a Christian, pretend to say the pub-
lication of such a worK was without that in-
tention? A child who has had common at-
tention shown to his education must know
better : But it is fit I should tell you, that ig-
norance in no case can be allowed as an ex-
cuse.; the moment a man engages in such a
trade as you were carrying on, he contracts
and enters into an obligation to see and know
that every publication be sends out into the
world, is consistent with religion, morality,
decency and good manners ; and if it is defi-
cient in any of these, he is the person who
must be answerable for, and talce the c6n*
sequences ; and it is for the interests of all
good covemroents that no such publicalions
should be suffered to poison the minds of the
people.

This Court has taken the case into consi-
deration and will not pass so severe a sentence
as it perhaps would, only upon account of
Mr. Erskine's silggestioO; and nad it not been

that your atlomey behaved so ill upon tb«
occasion; they do not pass so severest sen-
tence as they would have found themselves
bound to have done : Therefore the sentence
they pass Ufion you is, that for this offence
you be imprisoned in the House of Correction
for the county of Middlesex, there to be kept
to hard labour for the space of one year, and
then to give security, on your own recogni-^
zance, in the sum of One Thousand Pounds,
for your gpod behaviour for the term of your
life.

Mr. Williams,-^! trust it will not be too
great an indulgence that I may have a bed.

hovd Kenyan. — I cannot order that : I dare
say you will be treated properly. I wish to
have it understood, that this sentence is a
very great abatement of the punishment ; as
in modern times, within the period I have
sat in Westminster-hall, three years impri-
sonment has been ordered for an offence of
much less enormity than this ; for tliis publi-
cation is horrible to the ears of a Christian.

Saturday next after fiflcen days from the
Feast^y of Easter, in the thirty-eighth
year of King George the Third.

Middlesex.-^The King against Thomas
Williams. The defendant being brought
here into Court in custody of the keeper
of his majesty's gaol of Newcate by virtue
a of Rule of this Court ana being by a
jury of the country convicted of certaip
trespasses contempts and grand misde*
meanors in publishing certain blasphe-
mous libels whereof he is indicted It is
ordered That he the said defendant for
his offences aforesaid be imprisoned ia
the House of Correction in and for the
countv of Middlesex and there kept tp
hard labour for the space of one year no^
next ensuing And that he the said de-
fendant do give security by his own re-
cognizance in the sum of one thousand
pounds for his good behaviour during
nis natural life And he the said de-
fendant is now committed to the custody
of the keeper of the said House of Cor-
rection to be by him kept in safe custody
in execution of this judgment and untU
he shall have given such security a^
aforesaid. By the Court*

ZtlJ

Triitl of David Madane.

A. D. 17W-

r7*8

622. Trial of David Maclane for High Treason; before the
Court holden under a Special Commission of Oyer and
Terminer, at the City of Quebec in the Province of
Lower Canada, on Friday the 7th day of July: 37
George III. a. d. 1797.*

A Sped&l Commissiooi of Oyer and Ter-
mioer, was issued od the 24tli of May, 1797,
under the Great Seal of the province of Lower
Canada, impowering the justices thereby as-
signed, or any three of them (Quorum tin'
4-c J to inquire, hear and determine alt high
treasons and misprisions of high treasons,
committed within the district of Quebec.

The Justices assigned were

The hon. William Osgoode, his majesty's
chief justice of the province; the hon.
James Monk, chief justice of his majesty's
Court of King's bench for the district of
Montreal; the hon. Thomas Dunn, Jen-
kin Williams, and Pierre Amable De-
bonne, justices of his majesty's Court of
King's- bench for the district of Quebec ;
the hon. Paulu Roc De St. Ours; the hon.
Hugh Finley, the hon. Francois Baby, the
hon. Joseph De Longueil, tlie hon. Pierre
Fanet, the hon. James Jilac Gil), the hon.
John Lees, the hon. Antoine Juchereau
Ducbesnay, the hon. John Young; mem-
bers of the Executive Council.
The chief justice of the province and the
chief justice of the KingVbench of Montreal
were of the quorum.

The precept was signed by the chief justice,
l^r. Justice Dunn, Mr. Justice Williams, and
Mr. Justice Debonne ; was tested the twenty-
sixth day of May, returnable on Monday, the
twelAh day of June, which made fifteen da^s
exclusive between the teste and return. This
was ordered upon the precedent of the precept
issued for the trial or the Scotch rebels, in
1746.t

On Monday, the Hth of June, the Special
Commission was opened at the Court-nouse
10 the city of Quebec.

Prffeitf— The hon. chief justice Osgoode, the
hon. Mr. Justice Dunn, the hon. Mr. Jus*
lice Debonne, the hon. Hugh Finlay, the

. lioiu Francois Baby, the hon. Joseph De
Longueil, the hou. Antoine Juchereau
Ducbesnay, the bon. John YcAing.
The Commission was openly read. The

■hcnfifthen delivered in the panelof the Grand

* Taken in short-hand, and printed at
Quebec by W. Vondelvenden, Law printer tq
the Kin^t moti excellent majesty.

f See Fost: 1, and, utUi, Vol, id| p. 329..

VOJ-.XXVL

Jury, which was called over^ and the follow-
ing gentlemen were sworn.

THB OaAND JU&T.

F. LeMaistre,foreman.
Peter Stuart.
JacGues Perrcacrlt.
Nathaniel Tavlor.
Louis Germain.
John Coffin.
Hy polite Laforce.
Comte Duprc.
Charles Pinguet.
Louis Turgeon.
James Frost, esqs.

George Allsopp.
Louis Dunierc.
Jacob Danford.
Augustin J. Raby.
Kenelm Chandler.
John Craigie.
Alexander Dumas.
Fran9ois Filion.
John Purss.
Pierre Langlois.
Joseph Drapeau,esq$.

After the usual proclamation for silence,
the following charge was given to the Grand
Jury, by,

Chief Justice Osgoode,

Gentlemen of the Grand Jury ;^«-The bills
of indictment for the crime of high treason,
that have lately been found by the grand in-
quest of a neighbouring district, and the re-
cent commitments that have tak^n place for
the same crime in the district of Quebec, af-
ford abundant proof of the expediency of the
act passed in the last session of the legisla-
ture, foi^ the better preservation of his ma«
jesty's government, as by law happily esta-
blished in this province. — On the present oc-
casion, however, it has no^ been necessary to
resort to any of the powers created under tha^
act ; and on account of the formalities and
delays incident to the proceedings on an in-,
dictment for high treason, as a considerable,
period of time must necessarily elapse be«
fore a trial could be had within the stated
terms allotted for the administration of cri-
minal justice ; — His excellency the {tovernor.
has thought proper to direct the special com-
mission you have now heard read, to issue..
This measure was adopted in tenderness to
the parties committed— to relieve them front
a long confinement should they be innocent,
or for the benefit of a prompt example should
they he guilty. It now becomes your duty,
gentlemen, in consequence of this commission
to inquire into such charges as shall be laid
before you, respecting the crimes of high trea-
son, or misprision of treason, within this dis-
trict, and either to find or to ignore the same;
f nd also to present any persons whom you
9iay know to have committed the like crimes^

3 A

T«S!| $7 GfidRGE nr.

should any such have come within your know*
ledge.

Injustice t0 tb^prople of this province it
should be observed, that^ from the first es-
lnblishment of the British govemmeia in this
colony, down to a certain period, the crime
of high treason, to hr from being committed,
had perhap» not beep mentioned from the
Behch,' OP even held a place in the ' enumera-
tion of offences likely to be attempted. Till
this period, the Canadians, convinced by ex-
perience that they had the fuU.enjoyment of
t^^wf privilege to which their ancestors had
been accustomed, and that they were also
exempted from many rigorous services inci-
dent to a govemmelit purely monarchical,
contentedly lived under the kine^s mild do-
minion, and showed their satisfaction by a
chearfui submission to the lows. It need
hardly be mentioned that the period to which
I allude is that of the sanguinary revolution
in France, since which time emissaries have
been sent ibrth, as well native as proselytes,
under the pretence of difiusihg liberty, to dis-
turb the quiet of all settled governmeuts.
Every symptom of disobedience, and the few
instances of marked disaffection, that have
appeared in this colony, may be traced to
this cause of delusion. It is therefore some
6onsolation to reflect that the evil is not of
native growth, but has been introduced by
the insidious arts of mischievous foNigners,
practising on the minds of the ignorant and
credulous natives. Since, then, commitments
have taken place for crimes hitherto unper-
petratedy and till of late unsuspected in this
province,, it becomes the duty of the bench to
€rxplaiti somewhat more fully, in the charge,
the general' heads of the ooence imputed to
ihe prisoners, that yon, gentlemen, may be
eaabled to apply the principles laid down to
tb^ ta^s thai may be brought before you.

At the period when laws were framing,
after the first formation of society, it must
iHave occurred as a principle of natural justice,
16 those emfrloyed in reflecting on the subject,
iHm the punishment to be inmcte^ on crimes
should be proportioned to the enormity of the
Mknce, To that end it became necessary to
foTta ft settle of erim^, of wbkh the mda-
Itons Sljou(d be regulated by the pfermcieus
tendency of fhe act eomtnhted. The first
object in fVaifaing laws is t» establish cerlaiin
ri^l^«ndfo secore them, as fair as human
sanctions tnay prevail, bo^h for the pi^serva-*
tion of the geheral bod^ of society and fbr th«
j>rotection of individual interests. As all
erimes consist in the violation of some right
the magnitude of the ofience must depend on
the nature of the right thei^by violated ; con-
sequently, of crimes the greMestis that which
h immediately destructive of eovernment,
and the smallest is the least possible injustice
done to an individual. To this highly des-
tructive crime different appellations have, at
difnprent times, been given. The earliest
mrltet on the English law, has described this

Triaf of David Machne

vru

crime under the term Isse majesty, which he
states to be, when a person attempts a&j
thing against the kite's life, or fo rawLMi*
tion against him, or in the army, though
what was designed be not omied into effect,
and that all those who give aid, counsel, or
consent thereto, were eaually involved in the
guilt. The law requirea an accusation of thi»
crime to be made with all expedition, the in-
former was not to stay two nights, nor two
days in one place, nor to attend to the most
urgent business of his own : he was hardly,
permitted, as is mentioned in the book, to
turn his head behind him, and the dissem-
bling the charge for a time made him a sort
of accomplice.

The cnme, soon afler, was designated br
the term of high treason, and was describe^
by subsequent writers, according to the pre-
vailing notions of the time : it was generally
understood to consist in a breach of the fiutn
and allegiance due to the crown ; which is a
notion sufficiently correct ; but the principal
grievance arose from the want of a specific
definition of those particular offences against
allegiance which should constitute the crime
of high treason. For, by a plausible kind of
induction, many lawless acts of a criminal
nature might, in those unenlightened times,
be shown to offend against allegiance. It is
therefore no wonder that piracy was under-
stood to be classed among treasonable of-
fences, as likewise the concealment of trea-
sure trove. So was also an appeal to a fo-
reign secular jurisdiction; for, this imported
renouncing of the king's authority in his
courts nf justice. Counterfeiting the great
seal, was, by some, held to be hi^h treason^
on account of the authenticity ascribed to the
instrument, at a time when, from wan^ of Ii«
terature, some visible svmbol was necessary
to stamp a credit on public and private tranv
actions of state; but, by otiiers, the counter-
feiting of the great seal, as wellasofthe king>
money, was classed under a description at
crime called fausonnerie or falsifying. Th^
killing of a king's messen^r was heM to ht
treason, till at length the imputation of trea^
son seemed to be affixed to every cffence in
which the king's name was mentioned.
Among other extraordinary instances was the
case ofa person who had been sworn on thf
grand inquest, who, havii^ reveaHd the evi-
dence given upon an indictment fbr felony,
was, for such oisclosure^ hiaiBeif Indiplwi H
felony, and because helndnotkiaptiheluafc's
coansel, aocerdiag to the tenor of bla nUi,
theo^nce was, oy sonelieldtobeiceBaen,
but, ef this the chiefjustioe veotuicd aododbt.
In those turbulent tunes it vras evatomaiy for
the powerful barons esid e«faer greet nea ta
redress their piivate arievanoes, ind lo ett^
force vrbst th^ thougnt their due by their
own powers, tttta at length •eartle ti» m con-
strued into treason under Uie ^fftSkOkm of
accroaching the loyal peirer; thus ia fli#
case ef a klught in the neif^beuiftiwotf "ol

W3

J(0 High Treason.

A. D. 1797,

(723

LaodoHi wlwy vilhbl^ folIowerSpin a warlike
maiinery assaulted and detaiaed voother geii<
lleiiiaD txfi be pai4 biro ninety pounds and took
away hU borsc, tbe kriight was Indicted " f«r
Accroachinjg the ro^al power within the realms
while the £ug was in ioreign parts, by mani -
fest sedition against bis allegiance.** EIc was
convicted and prayed his cfcrgy, but it was
Tefused him oo account of the nature of the
crime. Hiis case happened in the 31st year
<>f the reign of king i:.dward 3rdy and occa-
sioned a petition in parliament, by the Com-
monsy that i| pnighi be declared '* in what
cases they accroached the royal power ;" to
ibis petition^ .according to the custom of the
iifoes, ao answer was given by tjie king, but
the answer appears to be ratlier elusive and
'Unsatisfactory. The grievances continued to
be so oppresisive, that the Commons would
not be cootentfid till some <nore precise and
accurate declaration should be made on the
subject, apd accordingly they ag^in petitioned
ibe king m the 9dth year of his reign, statinjg
** that, many persons were adjudged traitors
for dlyer^ caMses unknown to the Commons
io be treasQQ, aixd therefore requesting, that
4he kinj; would by his counsel and the great
«Dd wise men of tbe land, declare tbe pointy
^f treaaop lo that present parliament/' This
petition gave rise to the celebrated statute of
treason^^ which has stood the test of succeed-
ing ages without being altered in a single title
to this day, on accoimt of which and for other
excellent laws passed by that parliament, it
bhtained the appellation of the blessed parlia-
ment {litherto J have been stating what
was formerly held to be treason. I now pro-
ceed to ^how what is treason at this hour ;
for. on this statute it is that the indictments
to be !^ before vou will };e framed.

The points or beads of treason declared by
this act are seven in number.

The nrst is the compassing of the death of
tbe kingy queen, or prince, and declaring the
sam^ by an.o%ertact.

The second is, the violation of the king's
consort, the kiog*s eldest daughter unmarried,
or the prince's wife.

The third, the levying of war against the
kins in his realm.

Xne fJMJLrth ls» tbe adhering to the king's
«nemie8,^iving them aid and assistance within
the reialrn. or elsewhere.

TbefiAh, the counterfeiting the great or
yrivv seaL

The 3ixth, tbe counterfeiting the kina;*s
coin»or bringUig counterfeit coin into the
caakn.

The seveiUh, tbe killing of the chancellor,
tnttdmrer^ JM^fttice of the one bench or other,
justices 4)0 ^SJ^ justices of assize, justices
of Oyer %nd Terminer in their places doing
their fil^ees.

Ij^'this statute it ia observable, that an ex-
press exception is made, probably in reference
tothec«#f of tbe knisnt alreadjr stated. to
bive 0y^ |J9^ lo the ronvec^titipp^ tbat if

$, m^n.^hall ride armed against i^nother with
intent lu kilt or imprison nim, it shall not b^
adjudged treason, but felony or trespass, as
the case may be, according to the ancient
usages of the realm.

Tlie statute further requires expressly, that
the parly accused of the different kinds of
trea^n therein declared, shall be attainted
upon sufficient proof of some open act, by
men of his own condition. Some of the
treasons thus specificvl do, of themselves im-
port an open act, such as counterfeiting the
scab or killing the chancellor. Others again
respect the intenlion ot the mind, such as com-
passing the king's death. But as, to discover
tfje secret purposes of the heart is the attri-
bute of Omniscience alone, as it would bd
highly oresumptuous and dangerous in hu-
man tribunals, to take cognizance of the com*
passing of men's minds, without some sub-
stantial evidence of the intention. The law
therefore requires that such compassing be
proved by some open act. Fanner, it has
been determined that mere words alone, with-
out reference to some design on foot, or unac-
companied by some act, will not amount to
treason ; the observation being, that words
may make an heretic^ but not a traitor, Mrithout
an overt act. Wxiimgs also of a treasonable ,
tendency, while they remain unpublished and
unconnected w'lh any actual project, will not
itiake a man a trjiitor, how pernicious soever
their tbeorj* may be, but on the otlier hand,
as all writmgs import a deliberate act, and
more especially when published, so they may
be produoal as overt acts of different kinds of
treason. Thus Cardinal Pole, who, though a
subject of Henry 8th, and related to him in
blood, wrote and published a book in which
he incited the emperor Charles 5tb,atthattime
preparing war against the Turks, to bend his
force again&t England, and against Henry 8tU
the cardinal's natural sovereign and hegej
the writing of this book is staled, by lord
Coke, to be a sufficient overt act within the
statute of coQipassiuo; the king's death, but
not of the branch of adhering to the king's
enemies, because at the time of publishing
the work as has been justly observed by sir
Matthew Hale, the emperor w.as at peace
with the king: from which it may be infer-
red that, had the emperor been at that time
an enemy, it might have been charged as an
overt act of giving aid and assistance to the
king's enemies. Moreover, where papers re-
lating to certain detercninate treasonable pur-
pose, proved to be the handwriting of the
party accused, are found in his possession,
they may be given in evidence against him
though unpublished. For, it is admitted by
sir ATichael Foster one of the mos>t intelligent
and liberal of those who have discoursed uoon
high treason, that, had the papers found in
Mr. Sydney's* closet been plainly relative to
the other treasonable practices, charged in the

• Sep Sydney '« tciai, anU, Vol. 9, p. 81?.

787]

S7 GEORGE lU.

Trial tf David Madang

[7»

lodictmeDt, they might hi&vt been read la
evidence against him though not published.
So likewise^ if words are used with regard^ to
fiome treasonable design, and are accompanied
hy an act tending to the same purpose, and
proof thereof is given, the words coupled with
the act will amount to treason. This has been
adjudged in the case of one Crobagan, who,
being at lisbon, said, I will kill the king of
England if I can come at him, the indictment
havmg,set forth the words, and it being charg
^d thai he came into England for that pur-
pose, this overt act being proved, he was con-
victed of high treason.

To show bow leligiouslv the words of this
statute have been attended to, and fully to
{explain the nature of an overt act, I shall
mention the most memorable case that ever
pccurred on this head of treason, which was
that of the regicidesf of Charles 1st; they
were not indicted for murdering the king,
but for compassing his death and his execution
%y warrant under their hands, was given as
pui overt act of such compassing.

Another head of treason is that i)f levying
war against the king in his realm ; this is ei-
ther positive, or constructive. It is positive
80 far as it applies to any rebelUous insurrec-
tion by a pretender to the throne or factious
demagogue, with drums or trumpets, in mar-
tial array, either to dethrone the king, or to
take him into their power, under pretence of
altering the measures of government, or of
removmg evil counsellors. By construction
of law it extends to those cases where insur-
gents move not immediately against the king's
person, but for the purpose of carrying into
execution any jgeneral and illegal design,
such as to pull down all turnpikes, to destroy
all meeting houses, to expel all foreigners,'to
reform any real or imaginary grievance of a
public nature, in which the insurgents have
no particular interests jf for the law has pro-
vided a peaceable mode of seeking redress in
these cases by petition to either branch of
the legislature}. But, as it was solemnly re-
solved in a recent case, every attempt, by in-
timidation or violence to obtain the repeal of
a law, comes within this branch of the sta-
tute, and is treason.

Another head of treason is that of adhering
to the king's enemies, and eiving them aid
and assistance within the realm or elsewhere.
From the nature of the depositions taken on
the commitment, it is probable that the in-
dictments may have some reference to this
charge. By the cases on this branch of trea-
son It has been adjudged, that it is not neces-
sary the aid and assistance intended should
actually be carried into effect. Lord Preston*
and two other gentlemen intending to join
James the Snd, afler his abdication, were
taken on the river Thames on their pnsssage
to France, with letters and papers to induce

• ilnt^, Vol.5, p. 947.

t See his case, antB, Vol. i 9, p. 645*

Louis 14th, to promot* a tchemafbr iovadtng
the kingdom in favour of king James. Thiii
setting off was determined to be an overt act
of their intention to aid and assist the king's
enemies, and although they were apprehend-
ed before any part of their traitorous design
was carried into effect and before they had
even quitted the realm, yet, the act of em-
barking with such intention being found by
the jury, it was held to be a sufficient act of
adhering to the king's enemies, and the par-
ties were convicted much about the samelime,
when there was a war between England and
France ; one Vaughan obtained a commissioa
from France and went upon a cruise against
the kin^s subjects, he was taken near the
Downs, and though no other act^ of hostility
was proved or charged agtunst him^ yet, tha
act of cruising was held to be a sufficient ad-
herence to the king's enemies and he was
convicted and executed. In queen Anne's
time it was discovered that one Gregg,* a
clerk in thesecrctary of state's office, gave no^
tice by letter to the French ministry, of the
Dumber and destination of a Ixidy' of troops
going on some military enterprise ; his letters
were intercepted, and he was thereupon in-
dicted of high treason for compassing the
queen's death and adhering to her enemies ;
he pleaded guilty to the charge and was exe-
cuted. Another case on this branch of the
statute occurred towards the latter end of the
reign of his late majesty George Snd, and was
that of Florence Henseyf a nhysician who
was indicted of high treason for compassing
the king's death, and for adhering to, aiding
and corresponding with the king^s enemies ;
the overt act charged against htm was the
writing of letters, solicitmg a foreign prince
to invade the realm; now, although these
letters were intercepted, and never reached
their place, from which to ordinary compre^
hensions it mieht seem that his ofience was
not very hurtful ; yet, lord Mansfidd laid it
down as a point most undoubted that the of^
fence of sending intelligence to tlie enemy of
the destinations and designs of this kingdom
and government, in order to assist them iri
tiieir operations against us, or in defence of
themselves, is high treason.

From the principles of these adjudged cases
it may therefore oe concluded that, should
any person being a confederate with, or em-
ployed by the king's enemies, declare an in-
tention of coming into the province, at a
given or any time, with a design of promot-
ing an insurrection, either to surprise a king's
fortress or to deliver any part of the province
into the hands of the enemy, and he do ac-
tually come in with such intention, the same
is unquestionably an overt act of adherence
and is high treason. The same law was laid
down in lord Preston's case, when he was
told by lord C. J. Holt «* Your lordship took

* See bis case, anU^ Vol. 14, p. 1971.

t Saethe case, nnti^ Vol. 19: p.' 1941^' *

799]

Jbr H^ Tr§uoH0-

A. lb. 17d7.

[730

boat in Middlesex in ptoflecutioo of that in-
tention, there is an oTert aet in tliiseounty of
Middlesex;" afterwards he was told firom the
bench, " you took water at Surrey etairs, and
every step you made in pursuance of this
journey was treason, wherever it was."

Every charge of high treason is laid to be
done against the allegiance due by the party.
Every person, being within the king's domi-
nions, owes him allegiance. If a subject,
his allegiance is natural, if an alien it it tern-
oorary : and for that purpose eveiy alien was
fbrroerly compellable to be sworn at the
court leet. Whilst an alien friend continues
]Mceably in the king's dominions he is en-
titled, in common with the king's subjects, to
the protection of the law, from which he may
obtain redress for any injury to his person or
property; in return for this |yrotection he
owes the duW of allegiance. There can be no
doubt therefore, if an alien friend come into
this province (for the words of the statute are,
wriikin the reaim or ti$ewkere) whh an intent
to give aid and assistance to the king's ene-
mies, it is a breach of the allegiance he owes
to the kin^ during his residence in this pro-
vince. It IS observable that most of the in-
dictments for adhering to the king's enemies
have been framed upon two branches of the
statute, ^rst, on that of compassing the king's
death, and secondly on that of adhering. This
practice is founded on an inference of law,
that he, who adheres to the king's enemies,
engages in and supports a warfare^ by which
the king's personal safety is endangered, and
therefore such traitor compasses his death ;
when the warfare is excited in that part of
the dominions where the king personally re-
sides, in case of successfiil invasion hj the
enemy, the probability of his death is not
very remote. In contemplation of law his
life bis always compassed by his enemies, and
the statute, having no limitation of place, is
to be taken generally. Whether the crown
officer may choose to adopt or reject the charge
of compassing the kins's death is a matter of
mere aiscretion. If former precedents are
pursued, the charge cannot vitiate the indict-
ment for the reason before assigned ; if they
are departed from, the char{;e of adhering to
the king*s enemies 1% of itself if prov^, a
substantial and sufficient branch of treason.

NotwitiKtandinff the statute of Edward 3rd
bad defined, witn sufficient precision, the
several offences that should constitute the
crime of treason, yet, several additional de-
claratory acts were passed and new treasons
were added by subsequent parliaments. Many
sovereigns acquired a deserved popularity at
the commencement of their reiens by pro-
curing the repeal of some of the treasons
created in the time of their predecessors. The
first act of queen Mary waS| to repeal all trea-
sons, but only such as be declared and
expressed to be treasons by the statnte made,
as the met expresses it, '* in the 2&th year of
the reign of tne most noble king» of famous

memoi)r, king Edward Srd.^ But some of the
repealed treasons, especially those respectini;
the coin, were aoon re^^nacted. In the
factions strugelea that prevailed during the
reigns of Charles 9nd, and James 9nd, many
oppressive measures took place as each party
obtained the superiority. In the reign of
James 9nd, it wsh fbund that the safety of the
subject was too much in the power of vindic-
tive ministers. To v^naedy this evil, an act
was passed in the reign of king William Srd,
fbr tne regulating of trials in cases of high
treason in which many salutary previsions are
made for the protection of the party accused,
and many just and reasonable means of de^
fence were directed to be admitted, which had
formerly been disallowed ; and it is specially
enacted that no person whatsoever shall be
indicted, tried, ot attainted of high treason,
but by and upon the oaths and testimony of
two lawful witnesses, either both of them to
the same overt act, or one of them to onei
and another of them to another overt act or
the same treason. The' different kinds or
heads of treason have already^been mentioned,
and the true construction of this clause of the
statute may be explained by a case put from
the bench, if an indktment for compassing^
the kinj^s death, they being armed with w
dagger tor the purpose of killing the king, be
laid as an overt act, and they being armed
with a pistol for the same purpose as anotbei^
overt act ; it was held that the proving of one
of the overt acts by one witness, and the other
by a different witness was proof by two wit-
nesses within the meaning or the statute. By
an act passed in the 7th year of queen Anne,
which is now in force (it being enacted that it
should take effect after the death of the Pre-
tender) farther provision is made in behalf of
parties indicted for high treason, which, as.
they are nowise connected with the duties of
the grand inquest, it were needless to mention,
although they must necessarily be observed
on the part of the prosecution. The com^'
ments made by the mteHieent and humane
author of the Discourse on High Treason, on
the probable effects of this statute it Is hoped
will not be cenfirmed in this province. Aad
he lined to theu ttfuei, perkapt he mould have
reojon to iuipeet that tome of the bad end$ he
deprecated hofoe alreadif been aeeomplithed.
Having taken up so much of your time,

gentlemen, I shall conclude my observations
y remarking, that the duties of your office
do at this period, involve the most serious
and important considerations. Should you
have reason to credit the evidence tliat wilt
probably be produced, you will find that a de-
sign has been some time since on foot, which;
ifcarried into successful executbn, would sub*
vert the gpovemmeut under which we live, and
endanger the life, liberty, and property of all
his majesty's faithful subjecU in this province*
These are serious consequences. But as it
would ill become a couft of Justice to excite
your feelings by a representation of projected

7313^ 37 GEOIlGEJ«L

m\% m^ I tiwt, itkaomocisMry to miwk^
mnd yaw lo ^oter mpMi Uw inquiry «iU»
calmneBB ind Mibfrallioo. G«Dtlamfn of
your aducatiaB 4b4 esnt f ien««, will, of counop
pii>^ lilt)e rcflpwfl lo idle voporU, or vAia mii^
BMAWr should the .charge be lbi» weakly Mip-

Cited ; biil should probable evideace be laid
fore you i^ two wHoesiis teodiDg to fix the
perptU«tioi9 of Miy oae of tha overt acts,
fharged io the lOfKalfiieDi (for due pDoof of
af»y one of Uie ov«rtacte.wiU support a coo*>
viction)» you wiJil thhiic it ineMqabeui oa you
to prefer aaaconMlioa «c^^ ^^ 9*^ ^^^
his iuoocoBce or guill may appear tiy «?erdkfc
ofiheoouolry.

QentlenciV I will detah» you no longer.
Wing fully p^muaded Ihat, in ^le pef foitviaBec
ofyourdutyy you wiUico»dufi yourselves to
th» dmhuff^ 9£ your omr% couscienfee nad
the saiisfteittli^of the pportoue.

Tbo Couri adjpumed to W^doasdayi Ibe

Tryi ^^wi Madane

C73i

Wcdnegday, the i4tk of Jane,

The gmad jury presented a biU of iodid*
mant against Vmli Madane^ fsr .A«g4 rran*
e9iv whith they hsii Qoanimgusly found « trm
kiU.

On moliea of Air. Attorney Geaeml, a ml^
vas made in tiie following wonds :

** It ie ottiered that the sheriff of the tfistrlct

* of Quebec do forthwith deliver to Mr- At-
*• torney General a list of the jury, to be re-
*• turned bv him for the trial of the prisoner,
^ David Afaclane^ mentioning the names^

* professions, and places of abode, of such
^ jurorSy in order tnat such list may be deli-
^ vered to the prisoner at the same time that

* the copy of the indictment is delivered to
*• him."

TbeorisooerwnatftHMB tomghi to the bar
and informed by the Court that, a bill of w-
4»c4aient fi^r high iraaBoa had been found
againet him, of wUeh it was the duty of the
^Itorney-geMral to sonre hian with a cx>py,
togisther with lieu of the juvera to be returned
%y thd shenf for his trial, aad of the witnesses
tohepcodueedonthapaiteftbeoaown. The
€ourladded» tbat be was emilled to eeunsel,
if be wiehed lor such assistance.

The arisoner said, he did ; said on his ran
^mU, Mr. Pyke and IKIr. Francklin w«re as*
•IgUfd l^ the Ckurt to be bis coupsel.

Me. Attorney General then aB0Ted| *^ That

* the prisoner be new remanded, and (liat he
*" bebraoght to the bar of this ceartoa Fiilay
** tkB ibirtielh daj of this iaatant taeatkof
^ Jute, then to' be armigned.''

Whkk was tirdemd t mui tba Qmmk ad«.
jonmed to Friday, tfie gotk day of June

On Saturday, the tlKb ef June, acopy of
ibaindietflatiil» s)i«l«f ikm yaoas to be im*
VMieQflA bgp tiM aberif, .aii4 nte^f Hk ifib>

msasea to be produced by the crown for proving
^ iadictment^were delivered to the prisoner
in the manner directed by the statutp, 7 Anne^
o. fll^s. 11.

fridofff 30IA of June.

Pn$eni^Th9 Chief Justice, the Chief Jus-
tice of Montreal, Mr. Justice Dunn^ and
others his Msjesty's Justices, &c,

Dtrtid Maclane was arraigned upon the
following indictment :

Prmnmce rfLowir Ceaedo, > BE it remembered
J)uinct^QuekeetowU, ( thai at a special
session of Oyer and Terminer of our sovereign
lord the king of and for the district of Quebec
hioiden at the city of Quebec in the aforesaid
diatfict of Quebec pn Monday the twelfth day
of June in the thirty- seventh year of the reign
of our sovereign lord George the third bv tha

Kot of God of Great Britatn France and Ire#
d king defender of the foith and so fortb
Beibre the honourable William Osgoode chief
justice of our said sovereign lord the king of
his province of I/>wer CaUMa and the hoBour<#
able- Thomas Dunn and Pierre Amable Doi*
bonne justioee ef our said sovereign load tb«
king 01 his oourt of King's4moeh of and lor
the said district of Quek^ and others their
feUew justices and oommissieaers of our said
Iprd the king aesigned by letters patent under
bis great seal of his said province of Lower
Canada made to tdliem and others and anjr
three or more of them (of whom our said sove*
neiga lord the kins willed the afomsaid
honouni^ie William Osgoode or the honour-
able James Monk chief justice of our said
aaveneigu lord the king of his court of Kine's*
bench of and fiur the dtsldct of MontresI in
the said provine& in the same^letters patent
named and appointed to be one) to inquire by
the oath of «iod and lawful men of the dia-
trict of Quebec in the said province of Lower
Canada of all high treasons and of all mispri*
stoos of high treasons or of any of them within
the said ^strict of Quebec (as well within
liberties as without) by wkiomsoever and in
what manner soever done committed or per-
petrated when how and after what manner
and of adl other articles and circumstances
concerning the premises and every or any of
them in any manner whatsoever and the said
tfoasone and misprisions of treasons according
to the laws and customs of Ensland and of.tha
said pmvinorof Lower Canada for this time
to hear and determine by the oath of Francis
Ls MaisUe. Peter Stuart Jacques Perraolt
Nathaniel Taylor Louis Germain John Cofiia
Hyppe^eLaferce comte Dupre Charles Pin-
gnet Locks Torgeon James Frost George AH<«
sopp Lauis I>uoieiie Jacob Dangford Augustin
J. Kaby Kenelm Chandler John Craigie Alei<«
ander Dumas Franpois Filion John Pursa
PiflRV Langlois and Joseph Di^tlieau esquirea
good and ImtAiI nmn of the aforesaid dntiict

T3S}

fir High Ttmson.

K. D. I7BT*

173*

«f QuMiee now htre swom tiid charged to ia-
<Hiir« for our saiA soveMign lord th« king for
tiie body of th« siiid diitrict totiebing «Bd eon-
kerning the premiflee in tlie said letters patent
mentioned It is presented in manner and
form as fbUoweth tnat is to say
Dktnoi of Quebec ) THE jurors of our sore-
#0 fptf . { reign lord the kin» upon

thnr oath present tiiat on the first day of
March in the thirty-seventh year of the refsni
•f our sovereign lord George the third by the
f race of God of Great Britain France and Ire.
Md kins defender of the failh and so forth
and long before and ctrntinually from theeee
hitlMrto an open and public war was and yet
Is carried on i)etween our said sovereign lord
the king and the persons exercising the
powers of government in France that is to say
at the parish of Notre Dame de Quebec com-
monly called the parish of Quebec in l^
county of Quebec ra the dfstrict of C^ebec
aforesaid and that David Madane late of
the said parish of Notre Dame de Quebec
conHBonl^ called the pansh of Quebec in the
eoimty of Quebec in tftie district of Quebec
^foresaid merchant weH knowing the }n*e-
mises but not regarding the duty of his alle-
pance nor having the fear of God in bis heart
and being movea and seduced by the instiga-
tion of the devil as a false traitor against our
aaid sovereign lord the king wholly withdraw*
Ing his allegiance and contriving and with all
his strength intending the peace and common
tranquilltty of this province of Lower Canada
part of the dominions of our said sovereign
lard the king to disouiet molest and disturb
mnd to depose our said soven^gn lord the king
Horn the royal state title power and govern-
inent of the provinoe of Lower Canada part of
the dominions of our said aovereisn lord the
kine and to brins and put our saicTsoverdgn
lord the king to death heretofore to wit on the
aald lirst day of March in the thitty- seventh
vear aforesaid and on divers other days as well
before as after that day at the sakl |>arish of
Notre Dame de Quebec commonly called the
parish of Quebec in the county of Quebec in
the district of Quebec aforesaid maliciously
and traitorously with iorce and arms did com-
pass imagine and intend to depose our said
sovereign lord the king from the royal state
title power and government of this pm^nce
of Lower Canada part of the dominion^ of our
said sovereign lord the king and to bring and
put our said sovereign lord the king to death.
And to Mfil jpemct and bring to effect his
most evil and wicked treason and treasonable
eompaaeing and imaginalfens aforesaid He
the said Divid Maclane as saoh false tiwitor
m aforesaid durins the said war to wit on the
asid first day of March in the thirly-eeveath
vear aforesaid and on divers ottier days as weH
before as after that da^ at the aforesaid parish
of Notre Dame de Quebec eemmonly called
the parish <»f Quebec in the eoanfty uf Qaebec
in the district of Quebec aforesaid willh force
attdJMiRSfmilicionsly and tnulofoualirdid with .

divers otlier persona whose naaxs ata la the
Mttd jawm imkaown eonspive oonsolt eoa-
e^nt and agt^ to cauie prosura -aolieit and
incite the said peiaona exercising the powers
of ffovemment in France and bemg as afore-
said enemies of our said sovereign lord the
king to mvade this prwvhKe of Lowvr Canada
part of the dominions of our said sovereign
lord the king in an hostile manner and to
carry on the war aforesaid a|punai aur eaid
sovareign lord the king wMhm this provhsce
of Lower Canada part of the doasinions of otir
said sovereign iora the king

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect his most evil and wicked treason and
treasonabie •compasstne and imaginatiotts
aforesaid lie the ssfd David Maekne as
snch false traitor as aforesak) duihig the war
aforesaid to wit on the eaid first day of Maivh
in the tbdrtgr-seventh year aforesaid uid on
divers other dm as well before as afler that
day at the aakl parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonh' caftled the parish of Quebec
in the county or Quebec in the district of
Quebec aforesaid with force and arms maK-
eioualy and traitorously dkl solicit and incite
the said persons exercising the powers of gO«
-rerament in Franoe and being ae aforesaid
enemies of ear sakl sovereign lord the king to
invade thtspraviace of l/>wer Canada part of
the dominions of our eaid sovereign lord the
king in an hostile manner and to cany on the
eaid war against our said sovereign lord the
king within tl^is pfovinee of Lower Canada

Iiart of the doainioos of oar sakl soverei^
ord the king

And further to fblfil perfect and bring to
effect bis most evil and wicked treason and
troasonable oompassing and fmaginationa
aforesaid He the eaid David Maclane as
each false traitor as aforesaid during the war
aforesaid to wh on the said first day of March
ia the thirty«aevenlh year aforesak) and on
divers days as well heme as after Aat day kt
the aforesaid aarish of Notre Dame de Quebec
commonly called the psirieh of Quebec in the
^otmty ef Quebec in <he district of Quebec
aforesaid wvth force and arms maliciously and
traitoroualy'did with the aforesaid persons ex-
eroisin^ehepowere of government in France
and bdfig as aforesaid enemies of our said
aoveretgn 4ord the iciiig conspire consult con-
sent ami agrae to raise 4evy and make instn*-
rection rec^Hicn and 'war a^iast our eaid
eovorcign lord the king within this province
af Lower Canada aart^ ilke^ominkms <yf our
laid eovareign Jom tfie king and to invade ^e
said produce of Lower Canada part of the do-
entnions af our aaid soverrign ford the king
with ^ips and armed tnen a»l lb carry on the
aaid -war agjaimi onr send eorereiga foHl the
'king wftihki fhie province of Lower Canada
part of thedailmene of our sak) sovereign
ioidthattit

And htTMr ta MG) peifoct and bringto
effect his fnoet >evil and wicked treason and
tiaaaonaUa apnapassing 'and ioyapnalii^

7SS\

S7 GEORGE ill.

Trid Q/DavUMadane

[736

Aibreaaid He the said David MacUiM as
. siKh false traitor as aforesaid during the said
. vrar to wit on the said first-day of March in the
. thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on divers
other days as well before as after that day at
the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de Quebec
csommonly called the parish of Quebec in the
county of Quebec in the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously and
traitorously did with divers other persims
whose names are to the said iurors unknown
conspire consult consent and airree to raise
lev^ and make insurrection rebeOion and war
against our said sovereign lord the king within
this province of Lower Canada part of the
dominions of our said sovereign lord the king
9nd to aid and assist and to seduce pHsrsuade
and procure divers subjects of our said sove-
reign lord the king to aid and assist the said
. persons exercising the powers of government
in France and bemg enemies of our said sove-
reign lord the king as aforesaid in an hostile
invasion of this province of Lower Canada

1>art of the dominions of our said sovereign
ord the king and in the prosecution of the
war aforesaid against our said sovereign lord
the king

• And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect his most evil and wicked treason and

- treasonable compassing and imaginations
aforesaid he the said David Madane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the said war
to wit on the said first day of March in the
thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on divers
other days as well before as after that day at
the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonly called the parish of Que-
bec in the county of Quebec in the district of
Quel>ec aforesaid with force and arms maU-

, ciously and traitorously did solicit persuade
move and incite divers subjects of our said
sovereign lord the king to levy and make in-
surrection rebellion and war against our said
sovereign lord the king within this province
of Lower' Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord tlie king and to aid and
assist the said persons so as aforesaid exer-

■ cising the powers of government in France
and being enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king as aforesaid in an hostile invasion of
this province of Lower Canada part of the

. dommions of our said sovereign lord the king
and in the prosecution of the said war against
our sovereign lord the king

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect his most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imaginations
aforesaid he the said David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the said war
to wit on the said first day of March in
the thirty-seventh year aforesaid andondi-
vers other days as well before as after that
day. at the parish of Notre Dame de Quebec
commonlv called the parish of Quebee in the
eounty of Quebec in the district of Quebec

'Aforesaid with force and arms malickmsly

«nd traitorously did solicit penvade move

alid incite divers persons not being subjects
of our said sovereign lord the king to levy
and make insurrection and war gainst our
said sovereign lord the king within this pro-
vince of Lower Canada part of the dominions
of our said sovereign lord the king and to aid
and assist the said persons so as aforesaid
exercising the powers of government in France
and being enemies of our said sovereign lord
the Jung as aforesaid in an hostile invasion of
this province of Lower Canada part of the
dominions of our said sovereign lord the king
and in the prosecution of the war aforesaid
against our said sovereign k)rd the king.

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
e£Fect his most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imaginations
aforesaid he the said David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the said war
to wit on the said first day of March in the
thirty- seventh year aforesaid and on divers
other days as well before as after that day at
the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de Quebec
commonly called the parish of Quebec in the
county of Quebec in the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously
and traitorously did get ready raise and en-
gage several men whose names are to tlie
said jurors unknown to take up arms and
to levy and wage war asainst our said so*
vereign lord the king witnin this province of
Lower Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord the king and to aid and
assist the said persons exercising the powers
of government in France and being enemies
of our said sovereign lord the king as aforesaid
in an hostile invasion of this province of Lower
Canada part of the dominions of our said so-
vereign ioi:d the king and in the prosecution
of the said war against our said sovereign lord
the king.

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect his most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imiaginations
aforesaid he the said David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the war afort<-
said to wit on the said first day of March in
the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on di-
vers other days as well before as after that
day at the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonlv called the parish of Quebee
in the county ot Quebec in the district of
Quebec aforesaid with force and arms ma1i«
ciously and traitorously did consult and con-
spire with divers persons whose names are to
the sud jurors unknown arms and ammuni-
tH>n secretly and clandestinely to convey and
bring into this province of Lower Canada so
as aforesaid part of the dominions of our said
sovereign lord the kins with intent therewith
war insurrection and reoellion against our said
sovereign ford the king within this province
of Lower Canada part of the doroimons of out
said sovereign ford the king to levy and make
and to aid and assist the said persons exer-
cisinz the powers of government in France
and being as aforesaid enemies of our said ~~

737]

Jbr Hif^ Treason.

A. D. 1797.

[738

vereipi lord the kiog m an hostile invasion
of this province of I/>wer Canada part of the
dominions of our said sovereign lord the king
and in the prosecution of the war aforesaid
against our said sovereign lord tlie king.

And further to ful^ perfect and bring to
effect his most evil and wicked I reason and
treasonable compassing and imaginations
aforesaid he the faid David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the said war
to wit on the said first day of March in the
thirty-seventh y6ar aforesaid and on divers
other days as well before as afler that day at
the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de Quebec
commonly called the parish of Quebiec in the
county ofQuebec in the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously and
traitorously did enquire of divers persons and
did collect and obtain infoimation and intel-
ligence whether the subjects of our said so-
vereign lord the king in this province of Lower
Canada part of the dominions of our said so-
vereign lord the king were or were not well
affected to our said sovereign lord the king
and his j^vernment and were or were not
likely to join with and assist the forces of the
wd persons exercising the powers of govern-
ment in France and being as aforesaid ene-
mies of our said sovereign lord the kine in
case an hostile invasion should be by them
made into this province of Lower Canada

Cirt of the dominions of our said sovereign
nl the king with the intent to communicate
notify and reveal and to cause to be commu-
nicated notified and revealed such intelligence
«nd information to the said persons exercising
the powers of government in France and be-
ing as aforesaid enemies of our said sovereign
lord the king for the aid assistance direction
.and instruction of them the said enemies of
our said sovereign lord the king in their con-
duct and prosecution of the ^ said war against
our said sovereign lord the king.

And/urther to fulfil perfect and bring to ef-
feet bis most evil and wicked treason and trea^
. sooable compassing and imaginations afore ^
said be the said D^vid Maclane as such false
tuitor as aforesaid during the said war to wit
on the said first day of March in the thirty-
seventh year aforesaid and on divers other
days as well before as afler that day at the
parish of Notre Dame de Quebec commonly
■called the parish of Quebec in the county of
Quebec in the district of Quebec aforesaid
with force and arms maliciously and traitor-
.ously did obtain and acquire knowledge of
.the strength of the city of our sovereign lord
.the king qilled Montreal within thJ3 province
(Of Lower Canada part of the dominion's of our
said sovereign lord the Icing and haw the same
;city of Montreal might be attacked and in •
.vested and into the hand and possession of
r«oemies and fidse traitors against our said so-
vereign lord the king be taken and seized with
.intent to communicate' notify and reveal and
.to cause to be communicated notified and re-
vealed such the afoteaaid . knowledge so by

VOL, XXVL ,

li

him the said David M'Lane obtained and ac-
quired to the said persons exercising the
powers of government in France and ocing
as aforesaid enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king for the aid assistance direction and
instruction of the said persons exercising the
powers of government in France and bein^ as
aforesaid enemies of our said sovereign lord
the kinp in their conduct and prosecution of
the said war against our said sovereign lord
the kino[.

And farther to fulfil perfect and brine; to
effect his most evil ana wicked treason arid
treasonable compassing and imaginations
aforesaid he the said David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the war afore-
said to wit on the said first day of March in
the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on divers
other days as well before as after that day
with force and arms at the parish of Notre
Dame de Quebec commonly called the parish
of Quebec in the county of Quebec in the
district of Quebec aforesaid maliciously^ and
traitorously did depart from the said parish of
Notre Dame de Quebec commonly called the
parish of Quebec towards foreign parts he the
said David Maclane having then and there in
the possession of him the said David Maclane
information and intelligence whether the sub-
jects of our said sovereign lord the king in this
province of Lower Canada part of the domi-
nions of our said sovereign lord the king were
or were not well affectedto our said sovereign
lord the king and his government and were
or were not Rkely to join with and assist the
forces of the said persons exercising the powers
of sovernment in France and being as aforcf-
said enemies of our said sovereign lord the
king in case an hostile invasion should be" by
them made into this province of Lower Cana^

I»art of the dominions of our said sovereign
ord the king and havine also then and there
in the possession of nim the said David
Maclane knowledge of the strenetli of the city
of our sovereign lord the king called Montreal
within this province of Lower Canada part of
the dominions of our said sovereign lord the
king and how the same city of Montreal
m'gnt be attacked and invested and into the
hands and possession of enemies and fiilse
traitors against our said sovereign lord the
king be taken and seized with intent to com-
municate notify and reveal and to cause to be
communicated notified and revealed such in-
telligence information and knowledge to the
said persons exercising the powers of govern-
ment in France and being enemies of our said
sovereign lord the king as aforesaid for the
aid assistance direction and instruction of the
said persons exercising the powers of govern-
ment in France and neing as aforesaid ene-
mies of our said sovereign ford the king in the
conduct and prosecution of the said war
against our said sovereign lord the king.

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
efiect his most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imaginations
SB

tSSJ 87 GEORGE 111.

aforesaid he the said David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid during the war afore-
said to wit on the said first day of March in
the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on di*
vers other days as well before as aAer that
day maliciously and traitorously with force
and arms the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame
de Quebec commonly called the parish of
Quebec in thecounty of Quebec in the district
of Quebec aforesaid under the false feigned
and assumed name ofJacob Felt secretly and
clandestinely from foreign parts did enter.

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect his mo»t evil and wicked treason and trea-
sonable compassing and imaginations afore-
said he the said David Maclane as such false
traitor as aforesaid during the said war to wit
on the said first day of March in the thirty,
seventh year aforesaid and on divers other
days as well before as after that day at the
said parish of Notre Dame da Quebec com-
monly called the parish of Quebec in the
county of Quebec m the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously
and traitorously did with divers other persons
whose names are to the said jurors unknown
conspire consult consent and agree the walled
and garrisoned city of Quebec in the county
of Quebec in the district of Quebec aforesaid
one of the fortresses or fortified places of our
said sovereign lord the king to seize take and
wrest by surpuse from the hands and pos-
session of our said sovereign lord the king to
cause a miserable slaughter of and to destroy
the faithful subjects of our said sovereign lord
ihe l^ins and the said walled and garrisoned
city of Quebec into the hands and possession
of the persons exercisins the powers of go-
yernnMnt in France and being so as aforesaid
enemies of our said sovereign lord the king to
oeliver for the aid and assistance of the said
yersoas so as aforesaid exercising the powers
of government in France and being so as
aforesaid enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king in the prosecution of the said war
against our said sovereign lord the king.

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
elTect his most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imaginations
aforesaid he the said David Maclane as such
false traitor as aforesaid with force and arms
during the said war to wit on the tenth day
of May in the thirty-seventh year aforesaid
ihe walled and garrisoned city of Quebec
iri the county of Quebec in the district of
Quebec aforesaid one of the fortresses or for-
tified places of our said sovereign lord the
king maliciously and traitorously did enter
with intent the said walled and garrisoned
city of Quebec as aforesaid one of the fort-
resses or fortified places of our said sovereign
lord the kine to siege take and wrest by sur-
prise from Sie hands and possession of o\ir
said sovereign lord the king and to cause a
miserable slaughter of. and to destroy the
faithful subjects of our said sovereign lord the
king .and- the said walled and garnsoned city

Trial ofDawd MmsUuu

1^40

of Quebec into the handi^and possessiou of
the persons exercising the powers of eorem-
ment in France and being so as aforesaid
enemies of our said sovereign lord the king to
deliver for the aid and assistance of the said
persons so as aforesaid exercising the powers
of government in France and being so a^
aforesaid enemies of our said sov^reig^n lord
the king in the prosecutioh of the said war
against our said sovereign lord the kine in
contempt of our said sovereign lord the nng
and his laws to the evil example of all others
in the like case ofiending contrai^ to th^
duty of the allegiance of him the said David
Maclane against the form of the statute iii
such case made and provided and against tbd
peace of our said sovereign lord the king his
crown and dignity.

And the jurors aforesaid upon their oath
aforesaid do further present tnat on the first
da^ of March in the thirty* seventh year afore-
said and long liefore and continually fironk
thence hitherto an open and public war waft
and yet is prosecuted and carried on between
our said sovereign lord the king and the per-
sons exercising the powers of government in
France to wit at the parish of Notre Dame d^
Quebec commonly called the parish of Que-
bec in the county of Quebec in the district
of Quebec aforesaid and that th^ said David
Maclane well knowing the premises but not
regarding the duty of his allegiance nor
having tne fear of God in his heart and being
roovea and seduced by the instigation of the
devil as a false traitor a^nst our said sove-
reign lord George the third by the grace of
God of Great Britain France and Ireland king
def(&nder of th« faith and so forth and wholly
withdrawing the alleei&nce which he the said
David Maclane should and of right ought ta
have borne towards our said sdvereign lord
the king and contriving and with all hi^
strength intending to aid and assist the said
persons exercising the powers of government
in France and being as afbresaidTenemies of
our said sovereign lord the king in the prose-
cution of the said war against our said sbve-
reign lord the king heretofore and during th^
war aforesaid to wit on the said first nay of
March in the thirty-seventh year aforesaid
and on divers other days as well before sA
after that day with force and arms at tbi
parish of Notre Dame de Quebec commonly
called the parish of Quebec in the county m
Quebec in the district of Queb^ ai«!fresaid
maliciouslv and traitorously was adhering to
aiding and comforting the said persons exer-
cising the powers ofgovemment in France
then being enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king as aforesaid.

And m ttie prosecution performancte said
execution of his treason and traitorous «dh€^
tng aforesaid He the said pavid Macliliie iN
such false traitor as aforesaid duri^ the said
War to wit on the said ^t day ofmareh 1^
th^ thirty-seventh year aforesaid ahi onditeA
other days as well before 83 after tl|M daj il

II ' '

T41]

Jor Higk Trtoion.

A. D. 1797.

the said parish of Notre Dmrne do Quebec
f;oaiicnoaW called the parish of Quebec in the
pounty of Quebec ia the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously
^d traitorously did witb divers other persons
whose aaoies are to the said jurors unknown
c^oapife consult consent and agree to cause
prpcwEO solicit and incite the said persons ex-
ercising the powers of government in France
sod being as aforesaid enemies of our said so-
vereign lord the king to invade this province of
Lower Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord the king in an hostile
Snanoer and to carry ou the war aforesaid
against our said sovereigu lord the king within
ims province of Lower Canada part of the
4o«inioas of our said sovereign lord the king.

And in Airther prosocutMB performance
^pd eiecution of his treason and traitorous
•dberiag aforesaid He the said David Maclane
as sueh £slse traitor as aforesaid during the
aaid war to wit on the said (vst day of March
in the thirty- seventh vcar aforesaid and on
divers other da^s as well before as after that
4lay at tha said parish of Notre Dame de
jQuebecGomnionly called the parish of Quebec
in the county of Quebec in the district of
Quebec aior^aid with force and arms mali-
cieusljr and traitorously did solicit and incite
the said persons exercising the powers of go-
.vernment in France and beins as. aforesaid
enemies of our said sovereign lord the king
to invade this province of liowier Canada part
of the dominions of our said sovereign lord
the kins in an hostile manner and to carry on
the said war a(;ainat our said sovereign lord
the kiQg witbm this province of Lower
Canada part of the dominions of our said
sovereign lord the kiog.

And m further prosecution performance and
eaeeutipn of his treason and tiaitorous ad-
herine aforesaid He the said David Maclane
•» such false traitor as aforesaki during the
. said war to wit on the said first day of March
in the thirty-seventh year aioresaid and on
divers other days as weU before as afler that
.day at the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonly called the parish of Quebec
in the oounty of Quebec in the district of Que-
bec aforesaid with force and arms maliciously
and traitorously did witli the aforesaki persons
exercising the powers of government in France
end being as aforesaid enemies of our said
eoveseign lord the kin^ conspire cousult
copsent and acree to raise levy and make
ioaerrection rebellion and war against our
aaid sovereign lord the king within this pro-
vince of Lower Canada part of the dominions
of our said sovereign lord the king and to
invade the said province of Lower Canada
eart ^ the dominions of our said sovereign
lord the king with ships and armed men and
to cany on tne «id war against our said sove-
• reign lord the king witbm thi^ province of
XiOMer Canada part of the dominions of our
aaid Boveiei£B lord the king

AAd io Further ^oseicutioa periormaoce

^749

and execution of his treason and traitorous
adhering aforesaid He the said David
Maclane as such false traitor as aforesaid
during the said war tu wit on the said
first day of March in the thirty-seventh
year aforesaid and on divers other da^s
as well before as after that day at the said
parish of Notre Dame de Quebec com*
monly called the parish of Quebec in the
county of Quebec m the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously
and traitorously did with divers other persons
whose names are to the said iurors unknown
conspire consult consent aau agree to raise
lesy and make insurrectluo rebellion and war
against our said sovereign lord the king withiu
this province of lower Canada part of the do*
minions of our said sovereign lord the king and
to aid and assist and to seduce and persuade
and procure divers subjects of ^r said sove*
reign lord the king to aid and assist the said
persons exercising the powers of governmenjt
m France and being enemies of our said sove-
reign lord the king as aforesaid in an hostile
invasion of this province of Lower Canada
part of the duiuinions of our said sovereign
lord tlie king and in the prosecution oi thp
war aforesaid against our said sovereign lord
the king.

And in further prosecution performance
and execution of his treason and traitorous
adhering aforesaid lie the said David Maclane
as such false traitor as aforesaid during tl^
said war to wit on the said first day of March
in the thirty-seveulh year aforesaid and op
divers other djys as well before as after that
day at the said parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec cuniniouly called the parish of Quebec
in the cou:«ly of Quebec in the district of
Quebec aforesaid with force and arms mali-
ciously aud traitorously did solicit persuade
move and incite divers subjects of our said
sovereign lord the king to levy and make in-
surrection rebellion and war against our said
sovereign lord the king within this province
of Lower Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord the king and to aid and
assist the said persons so as aforesaid exer-
cising the powers of government in France
and being enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king as aforesaid in an hostile invasion of
this province of Lower Canada part of the
dominions of our said sovereign lord the king
and in the prosecution of the said war against
our said sovereign lord the king.

And in further prosecution performance and
execution of his treason and traitorous ad-
hering aforesaid He the said David ^laclane
as such false traitor as aforesaid during the
said war to wit on the said first day of March
the thirty-seventh vear aforesaid and on divers
other' days as well before as after that day at
the said parish of Notre Dame de Quebec
commonly called the parish of Quebec in tb{3
county ot Quebec in the district of Quebec
aforesaid with force and arms maliciously and
traitorously did solicit persuade move and

743j

ni GEORGE ni.

incite dirert persons not being subjects of our
eaid sovereign lord the king to levy and make
insurrection and war against our said sove-
reign lord the king within this province of
Lower Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord the king and to aid and
as^st the said persons so as aforesaid cxer-
cisins the powers of government ih France
and being enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king as aforesaid in an hostile invasion of
this province of Lower Canada part of the
dominions of our said sovereign lord the king
and^ in the prosecution of the war aforesaid
against our said sovereign lord the king.

And in further prosecution performance
-and execution of his treason and traitorous
adhering aforesaid He the said David Maclane
as such false traitor as aforesaid during the
said war to wit on the said first day of March
in the thirty- seventh year aforesaid and on
divers other days as well before as afler that
day at the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonly called the parish of
Quebec in the county of Quebec in the dis-
trict of Quebec aforesaid with force and arms
maliciously and traitorously did get ready
raise and en^e several men whose names
are to the said jurors unknown to take up
arms and to levy and wage war against our said
s:ivereign lord the king within this province
of Lower Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lorn the kin^ and to aid and as-
sist the saidpersons exercising the powers of
government in France and being enemies of
our said sovereign lord the king as aforesaid in
au hostile invasion of this province of Lower
/ Canada part of the dominions of our said
sovereign lord the king and in the prosecution
of the said war against our saia sovereign
lord the king.

And in further prosecution performance
and execution of his treason and traitorous
adhering aforesaid He the said David Maclane
as such false traitor as aforesaid during the
said war to wit on the said first day of March
in the thirty -seventh year aforesaid and on
divers other days as well before as after that
day at the aforesaid parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonly called the parish of
Quebec in the county of Quebec in the dis-
tricl of Quebec aforesaid with force and arms
maliciousljr and traitorously did consult and
conspire with divers persons whose names are
to the said jurors unknown arms and ammu-
nition secretly and clandestinely to convey
and bring into this province of Lower Canada
so as aforesaid part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord the king with intent
therewith war insurrection and rebellion
a^inst our said sovereign lord the ' king
within this province of Lower Canada part of
the dominions of our said sovereign lorri the
king to levy and make and to aid and assist
the said persons exercising the powers of go-
vernment in France and being as aforesaid
enemies of our said sovereign lord the king in
an hostile invasion of this province of Lower

Trial qfDarid MmiawM \1kk

Canada part of Ae domitdoes of oyr said sove->
reign lord the king and in the prosecutioii of
the war aforesaid against our said sovereigii
lord the kinr.

And in rortber prosecution performanca
and execution of his treason and traitorous
adhering aforesaid He the said David Maclane
as such false traitor as aforesaid durioff the
said war to wit on the said first day of Mam^
in the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and oa
divers other days as well before as after that
day at the aforesaid parish of Notre Damede
Quebec commonlv called the parish of Quebee
in the county or Quebec in the district «f
Quebec aforesakl with force and arms ma*
liciously and traitorously did inquire of divers
persons and did collect and obtain information
and intelligence whether the scdijects of our
said sovereign lord the king in this province
of Lower Canada part of the dominions of
our said sovereign lord the king were or
were not well affected to our said sovereign
lord the king and his {i^ernment and were
or were not likely to join with and assist the
forces of the said persons exereising the
powers of government in France and beme as
aforesaid enemies of our said sovereign lord
the king in case an hostile invasion should be
by them made into this province of Lower
Canada part of the dominions of our said
sovereign lord the king with intent to com-
municate notify and reveal and cause to be
communicated notified and revealed such
intelligence and information to the said per-
sons exercising the powers of government in
France and being as aforesaid enemies to out
said sovereign lord the king for the aid as-
sistance direction and instruction of them the
said enemies of our said sovereign lord thfe
king in their conduct and prosecution of the
said war against our said sovereign lord the
kin^.

And in ftirther prasecution performance
and execution of bis treason and traitorous
adheringaforesaid Hetlie said David Maclane
as such false traitor as aforesaid during the
said war to wit on the saki first day of March
in the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on
divers other da^s as well before as after that
day at the said parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonlv called the parish of Quebec
in the county of Quebec in. the district of
Quebec aforesaid with force and arms loati-
ciouslv and traitorously did obtain and aoquife
knowledge of the strength of the city of nur
sovereign lord the king called Montreal within
this province of Lower Canada part of the
dominions of our said sovereign lord the king
and how the same city of Montreal might iS
attacked and invested and into the hanoa and
possession of enemies and false trailers
against our said sovereign lord the king be.
taken and seiied with intent to comiHamcale
notify and reveal and to cause ta be comma*
nicated notified and revealed such the albra*
said knowledge so by him the said Davkl
Maclane obtained ana acqiied lo the said per*

T46]

fiit H^h TrmtM.

A. I>. 1797.

[74«

•oDB exettiting the powers of govenuneDt la
Frpace and being as afbreflaid enemied of our
eeid torereign lord the kiijg for the ud as-
abtance direction aad inslniction of the said
perBons exeroieing the powers of govenraient
ID France and being as aforesaid enemies of
our said sovereign lord the kio^^in their coo*
duct and prosecution of the said wtu* agunst
our said sovereigD lord the king.

And in further ]m>secutit)n performance
ami execution of his treason, and' traitorous
adhering aforesaid He the said David Id^lane
as such iislse tndlor as aforesaid durine the
•akl war to wit on the said first dajr of March
in the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on
divers Other days as well before as after that
day with force and arms at the sud parish of
Netre Dane de Quebec commonly called the
parish of Quebec in the county of Quebec in
the district of Quebec aforesaid maliciously
«ild traitorously did depart from the said
paVish of Notre Dame de Quebec commonly
called the parish of Quebec towards foreign
parts he the said David Machine having then
and there in the possession of him the said
I>avid Maelane information and intelligence
whether the sul^ects of our said sovereign lord
the king in this province of Lower Qinada
part of the domimons of our said sovereign
lord the king were or were not well affected to
our said sovereign lord the king andhis ^vern-
ment and were or were not likely to join with
and asrist the forces of the said persons exer-
cising the powers of government m France and
being as aforesaid enemies of our said sove-
reign k»rd the king in case an hostile invasion
should be by them made Into this province of
Lower Canada part of the dominions of our
said sovereign lord the king and having also
then and there in the possessbn of him the
said David Madane knowledge of the strength
of the city of our said sovereign lord the kmg
called Montreal within this province of Lower
Canada part of the dominions of our said
eovereign lord the king and how the same
city of Montreal mieht be attacked and In-
vented and into the hands and possesuon of
enemies and false traitors against our said so-
vereign lord the king be taken and seized with
intent to communicate notifv and reveal and
to cause to be communicated notified and re-
vealed such Intelligence information and
knowledge to the said persons exercising
the powers of government In France and being
enemies of our said sovereign lord the king
as afoitesaid fortheaid asiustance direction and
instruction of the said persons exercising the
powen of covemment in France and being
as aforesalo enemies of our said sovereign
lord the king in the conduct and prosecution
of the said war against our said sovereign lord
Ihe kiuf;.

And in further prosecution performance

' iMid execution of his treason and traitorous

adhering aforeaud He the said David Maelane

as such false traitor as aforesaid during the

war afofeiaid lo wit on the said first diry of

Match In the thirty-seventh year aforesaid
and on divers other days as well before as
aAer that day maliciously and tndtoroosly
with force and arms the aforesaid parish of
Notre Dame de Quebet commonly called the
parish of Quebec in the county of Quebec in
the district of Quebec aforcMsd under the
false feigned and assumed name of Jacob Felt
secretly and clandestinely from foreign parta
did enter

And in further prosecution performance and
execution of his treason aad traitorous ad-
hering aforesaid He the said David Maelane
as such false traitor as aforesaid during the
said war to wit on the said first day of March
in the thirty-seventh year aforesaid and on
divers other days as well before as afUr that
day at the afoTMaid parish of Notre Dame de
Quebec commonly called the parish of Quebec
in the county of Quebec in the district of
Quebec aforesud with force and arms mail-
ciously and traitorously did with divers other
persons whose names are to the saidjurora
unknown conspire consult consent and agree
the walled and garrisoned city of QuebM in
the county of Quebec in the district of Quebec
aforesaid one of the fortresses or fortified
places of our said sovereign lord the king to
seize take and wrest by surprise from the
hands and possession of our said sovereign
lord the king to cause a miserable slaughter
of and to destroy the faithfiil subjects of our
said sovereign ford the king and the said
walled and garrisoned city of Quebec into the
hands and possession of the persons exercis-
ing the powers of government in France and
bemg BO as aforesaid enemies of our said
sovereign kxd the king to deliver for the aid
and assistance of the said persons so as afore-
said exercising the powers of government In
France and bdng so as aforesaid enemies of
our sali sovereign lord the king in the prose-
cution of the sud war against our said sove-
reign lord the king.

And in further prosecution performance
and execution of his treason and traitorous
adhering aforesaid He the said David
Maelane as such false traitor as aforesaid with
force and arms during the said war to wit on
the tenth ^ of Mav in the thirty-seventh
year aforesaid the walled and garrisoned city
of Quebec in the county of Quebec in the
district of Quebec aforesaid one of the for-
tresses or fortified places of our said sovereign
lord the king maliciously and traitorously dud
enter with the intent the said walled and
garrisoned city of Quebec as aforesaid one of
Uie fortresses or fortified places of our saki
sovereign lord the king to seize take and wrest
by surprise from the hands and possession of
our said sovereign lord the king to cause a
miserable slaughter of and to destroy the ^
fiuthful sul^ecu of our sakl sovereign lord the
king and the said wall^ and garrisoned city
of Quebec into the hands and possession of
the persons exercising the poweia of ^govem-
nettt in FiraDce and bding so aaafansaid

f47] 37 QEORQP UI.

Siies of our taid sovennp losd the king to
eliv^r for the aid and assistance of the said
persons so ^ aforesaid exercising the poijrers
«f goverqmeht io France «nd being so as
aforesaid enemies of our said sovereign lord
jbe king in the prosecution of the said wax
against our sai4 sovereign lord the kifig in
eontemptofour said sovereign lord the king
pid his Uws to the evil example of all others
in the like case offending contrary to the
duty of the alUfiance of him the said David
Maclane against the form of the statute in
such case m^ude and provided and against the
poace of our said sovereiga lord the kipg his

frovn and digni^r*

f, Seivsx^
Attorney Gieneral of our sovereign
. k^ the i^ing pt and for hie pio^
vinceQf Lower Cauada.

David ItYiiD, Clerk.

«

To tins Indictment the niisoaer pleaded
KoT GviLTY ; and for trial, having put him-
eolf on God ^nd the couotry, the loUowing
nde was made :

<< It is ordeied, on motion of Mr. Attorn^
** Generaly that the trial of the prisoner David
<< Maclane he on Friday the 7th d^y of July
^ next, and that a precept in the nature of a
^wnire/acMi do issue to the sheriff of the
^ district of Quebec for summoning the petit
^jurorsi returnable on the same seventh
* day of July at seven of the clock in tjbe
f < Mornins/'

To wbi» time the Court then adjourned.

Trial fffiauM 9Man9

[748

, 1th Myy 1797.

Present,

TIae Chief Justfee [Osgoode]; the Chief
Juttioe of Montreal [Monk]; Mr. Justice
Duon; Hugh Finl^, Ffanfoise JBaby, Aat
toine J. Duchesnay, and Jotan Young, esqrs.

' Counutfor the Crown^-^Mr. Attorney Ge-
neral and Mr. Caron.

Omimtfor th4 Prtioiier.— Mr. Pyke, and
Mr. Eraoklin.

The court being opened at seven o'clock
jpreciseiy, and the prisoner David Maclane, set
Io the bar, the jurors impanelled by the sheriff
were called over ; eleven were challenged on
the part of the crown, and twentv-four oy the
prisoner* The following genUeroen were
$wom.

Tos JvftT*

John Blackwood, John Punter,

John Crawford, David Munro,

John Mure, James Irvine,

John Jones, James Orkney,

Jas. Mason Goddard, Eobert Morrogb,

jaeniy Cull, peorgc Symes.

^h» jury i the p risoaer, David Malcaae, stande
indicted, &c. [Htr€ ^kt Ckrk ojT the Arraigm
read the judiftmeiU], Up^ this indictment
be hat^ been arraigned, wi upon his arraiaip*
meni; b^th pleadS sot guilty, and for ws
trial hath put himself upon God and the
country, yf\^ch country you ace. Your ch^^
is to ei^qtiire, whether he he guilty of the
felony and high treason whereof he stands
indicied^ or not gMilty. If you find him guilty,
YOU are to enquire what goods or duttels^
lands or lepem^ats he had at the time of the
felpcy end hi&h treason committed, or at any
time since* If you find him not guilty, you
are Ao enauire whether he fled for it. If you
nad that be did fly for i^ you shall enquire ef
hii^ goods and chattels M if you bad ibuod
bimj^iUy. Ifypu find him not guilty, and
t)iat he did not tty for it, say so^ and no more.
T^ jjOiMryour evidence

Ms. CarfWir^May it please your Honoura,
and you GenUemen of the Jury ; Having the
honour to be of counsel for the crown in this
case, it beoomee my duty to open to you the
indictment found by the grand inquest of this
district against the prisoner at the bar. I
certainly OMist rcigret that being a. Canadian,
I have te address you in a language with
which I am not so conversant as with ny
naiive tongue ; acirciimstance which, nerhapl,
will not permit me to perform ttie duty
assigned to me with that precision and pro-
priety which the pre^e^tcase deserves. In
this particu]^, I mu#t beg leave to solicit
your (ndulgenoe.

Qendemen, the pnsoner at the bar, David
Maclane, stands charged with the highest
crime known in our laiw» high treason. The
first count of the indictment sets forth, that,
durioe the present war between our sovereigp
^Ard the king» and the persons exercising the
powers of govemmimt in France, he, the
lirisoner, withdrawii^g his allegiance, «s a
false traitor agisinat his majesty, and iniendine
io depoee biro, did traitorously compass ana
imagine his death.

The evert acts on this count are fourteen in
number, and in substance are as follows :

lat. That he c^tupirtd with divers persons
unknown to solicit the enemies of the kiag
to io«ade the province.

8nfl. That he did sdicit the king's ooemies
to invade the province.

and. That he coasptRsd with the king^ cne-
oaies to excite a rebellion in the province, and '
to invfMle -the province with ships and aimed
jnen.

4th. That he iw^wed with divers pereons
unknown, to saise a rebellion in the province,
to ^idaiKl assist, and to seduce the king's^sub-
jlMit^toaid and assist the enemy iaaniioilite
invasion of the province.

(th. '^hat he toUcited a«d Midied diven of
the king's subjects to levy war and rebeltion
agiinst the king in his proyl^q^ of X4»wer
Cenada,.and to aid and %«ai9t tqi^ esiff»9, in
^n (lostileiavaaion pf the wipp provii^c^.

74«]

fir tl^ TVrtflM.

«th. Thftt be toikHisd mi indtti ^UiH
persons, not beins subjects of bis majesty, to
levy war against tbe king in tbis pfotmce, ana
to aid and aasiM the enemy in an hostile in*
Tasion of tbe province.

7tb. That be fikadt ready and naUed, several
men unknown, to levy war against the king
within tbe province, and to assist tbe enemy
ih an hostile invasion.

8tb. That be contpired with divers persons
unknown, to convey into tbe province, artns,
and ammunition, with intent therewith to
wage war against the kin^, and to assist tiie
enemy in an hostile invasion.

9th. That he colhcUd infarmaii&n, whethet
the king's subjects vrere, or ^ere ttot well
affected, and whether they woiild or vrould
not Join tbe enemy in an bostile invasion df
the province with intent to comitiufaicate It
to the enemy.

10th. That he iacquired knowledge ef the
strength of the kihg^'s citv called Montreal,
and how it might be attacked and taken by
the enemy, with intent to communicate it to
the enemy.

1 ttb. That being possessed of tbe infortpit-
tion and knowledge set forth in the two last
overt acts, he departed from ihi parUk of
Quebec totoardn foreign p^rti^ witb ititent tb
communicate it to the enetny.

mh. That be eniired tkt patikh of Kotre
Dame de Queb^, secretly and clandestinely,
tinder the feigned and assutn^ name of
Jacob Felt.

ISth. That he conspired with divers per-
sons unknown, to seize by surprise the wailed
Mid garrisoned city of Quebefc, oiie of tbe
king's foiiresses, or fortified blaces ; to cause
tt miserable slat^bter of, and to destroy the
king's faithful subjects, and to deliver the
city into the hands of the enetny for the aid
and assistance of tbe etiemy in the ]|>resent
war.

14th. That he entered the waUed and gar-
ritoned city of Quebec, with intent to seize it
by surprise, to cause a miserable' slaughter of
and to destroy the king^s fitithful subject^,
and to deliver the city into tbe bands oT tbe
enemy^ for tbe aid and assistance of the enemy
in the present war.

Gentlemen, tnere is another count, charg-
ing tbe j)rfSoner with adhering to Xhto kind's
enemies dqring the present war; and tbe
overt acts liAd are the same a^ those laid Upon
the first count.

To this indictment the prisoner bath pleaded
not gniUy ; we. who are of counsel for tbe
croWn, will call our witnesses, and if they
prove tbe charge against htm, it wtH be your
(duty to find him Goilty.

Mr. Attorney Oenerni (BewellJ.-^May it
please your Ctohours, andyoU Gentlemeii of
the jury : Tbe duly of the office which I have
tbe honour to bold und^ his itoajesty's govcni-
tnent iti ibis province, calls meat this peridd
of the present prosecution, to stkpport the

A; D, IWT. [TBd

Id^tnient wbieh haa just himt opened by
my learned friend^-to support i^n indtctirienl
which ebarses the prisoner with the Ughest
crime oh which a Canadian jury can give a
verdict, and which requires from yoii, gentle-
men, who are now nnpahelled to try and
make triie deliverance between our sovereign
abd the unfortunate prisoner at tbe bar, the
haost serious attention; not imrticularly^ but
genef'sdly and equally, to the interests of tbe
crowii on one hand, and to those of tbe

firisoner on tbe others We are concerned fot
be prosecution^ but we cannot wish to de-
Erive tbe prisoner of any privilege to which
e is Entitled ; we can only ask from vou an
impartial altiintion to what we shall submit to
your consideration, and we are well satisfied^
that tbe same Impartial attention should be
paid to whatever may be adduced in his
defence. We expect at ;pour bands a tru^
verdict accopdine to the evidence.

Gentlemen, the duty which you are now
called upon to discharge is tbe most soleton
of all that belong to you as faiembers of civil
society. For mjr own part, I fM most sen^
sibly what the importance of the present
ease Well merits, and whatmvdwn officii^
situation at this modient requires ffom roe^
abd I well know, that the duty which In our
respective situations we are bound to fulfil iii
most tinpleasant ; yet^ however unpleasant
H may ob, wbatisver toay be iht fiselings
with whicn ha execution is accompanied,
it reinains our duty, and must thetefbr6
be perfimned. I can only wish that I may
discharge mine as well as, I am confident,
you wnl discharge yours; for, whatever
your verdict may be, it will, I have tbe
fullest conviction, be that which the justice
of the case will dictate, perfectly consistent
with what you owe to the prisoner and to
the country.

Gentlemen, tbe indictment bhat^ thb
prisoner with two distinct species of treason.
The one, compassing tbe king's death, tb^
other adhering to bis enemies; and both of
them are founded on a very ancient and ex-
cellent statute, tbe 95 Edwai^Srd, chap. Snd.
This att, though one of tbe first upon the
statute book, iS) afler tbe experience of ag^s,
the law of treason at this hour. Bv the letter
of the statute, "When a man doth compils^
" or imagine the death of our lord the king,"
be is guilty of high treason. It may appear
at thenrst viewj that these words restrict thb
crime to an itytefition tp kill the king pey^
Mnaily^ but that iti fact is not tbe case^ the
spirit of the statute, and the nnilbrm inter*
pretation which a loqg series of judkial deci-
sions has given tp that dame of it which I
have cite^C ^xt^ild tbe description of jthb
species of tr^son much beyona the liAfjted
^nse of petsond injury to the sovereigd.
Tbe king is pattly a natural, partly fi |)olHi6^
cbafabteF ; in the former be enjoys a naitihil
life, in tb(i latter a nolitical exlstehc^; iM t6
sfimat the destruction of the en^, fj/ttfitk

751] n GSORGB UI.

otheri constitutes the aime of high trea-
son; for, the political or civil death, as well
as the natural death of the sovereign is clearly
within the fmrview of the statute. The
reason why the statute has contemplated
bothy and why every court of justice, in
which this point has been canvassed has
uuiformly adhered to this interpretation, ap-
pears to be obvious. An attempt to destrojr
the political existence of the sovereign, tends
in net to destroy the king in person ; for,
experience, and recent experience has shown,
that the interval between the dethronement
of princes, and their deaths is but short. But
this is not the only consequence ; it tends also
-lo annihilate the constitution of government
of which the sovereign is the baid. Great,
therefore, and abominable as all attempts
apinst the person of the king must be, the
crime of compassing his political destruction,
in its consequence to society, is equaUy
atrocious.

Gentlemen, the second count of the indict-
ment charges the prisoner with an adherence
to the king's enemies. By the statute to
which I have before referred, ** If a man be
adherent to the king's enemies in his
realm, giving to them aid and comfort in
the realm, or elsewhere,*' he is guilty of
liirii treason. With the sanction of eveiy
judicial authority which the courts of our
mother country can give, this species of
treason has been uniformly held to include
all, who being bound by any description of
allegiance to our sovereign, have given aid or
assistance to his enemies in any f>lace what-
iever; and by the same authority it has been
repeatedly decided, that it b not necessary
that such aid or assistance should actually be
ffiven^ but that an intention to aid or assist
the kmg's enemies, where the party has done
what lay in his power to e£fect that intention,
.was dearly treason.

Gentlemen, treason is distinguished from
other crimes by one characleristic Generally
speaking, all crimes which are known in the
black catalogue of human depravity consist,
according to our law, in the act of the cri-
minal. A bare intention to commit an offence
is not punishable. In the particular species
of treason charged in this indictment it is
otherwise; the intention is sufficient; it is in
lact the crime itself, and from this peculiar
circumstance arises the necessity of tnat part
of indictments for high treason called the
overt acts. In this and in similar prosecu-
tions the object of the counsel for the crown
is to establish tlie treasonable intention of the
accused; for, that constitutes his offence.
But as the human intellect can only judee of
the operations of the mind by the acts of the
body, they are compelled to prove the ei^terior
conduct of the pfirty iDdictea,and from thence
to draw such conclusions of his intentions, as
tliat conduct will warrant. ,It is. also their
jduty to charge specifically in their indictments
.the several overt acts which they expect to

Trial ofDamd MadanM

C751

establlah. and fWMn which th^ mean to infer
the guilt of the culprit. This is their duty,
because the humanity of our law has com-
manded that it should be so, to give the pri«
soner an opportunity of knowing pointedly
the srounds on which he is accused and to
enable him to prepare his defence.

Gentlemen, the course of proceeding which
I have just delineated has been followed in
the present instance. Upon the first count
of the indictment, to prove that the prisoner
has meditated the suoversion of the king's
government, and consequently intended toe
destruction of his poUlical existence, fourteen
overt actaare laid ; and the same over acts
are repeated upon the second count, to prove
his intentkm to aid and assbt the lung's ene-
mies durine the present war. It is upon the
evidence wnich we shall offer, of the truth of
these several overt acts, that ]f ou, gentlemen
of the juiy, must form your opinion, whether
the prisoner is euilty or not guilty.

Gentlemen, naving stated thus much to
you, I proceed to submit the substance of tha
several overt acts here charged, to your con*
aideration.

The first avers, that the prisoner conipireA
with divers persons unknown, to solicit the
king's enemies to invade the province. •

The second, that in pursuance of this eon-
spirwy, he did solicit the king's enemies to
invade the wovince.

The tiiird, that he enteined into a similar
conspiracy with the republic of France, whose
subjects are the king's enemies, not only to
invade the province, but to excite a rebelhon.

The fourth, that he conspired with divers
other, persons unknown to excite a rebellion
in the province, to aid and assbt and ^to se-
duce the kins's subjects, to aid and assist the
enemy in an nostile invasion of the province*

The fifth, that he ineiied and solicited di-
vers of the king's subjects to join in the pro-
jected rebellion, and io assist the enemy in
the projected invasion.

Tne sixth, that he Incited and solicited di-
vers persons, not being the king's subjects, to
levv war against hb majesty in thb province,
and to aid and assbt the enemy in the pro-
jected invasion.

The seventh, that he enlisted and made
ready several men, to assbt in the projected
rebellion and invasion.

The eighth, that he conspired with others
to introduce arms and ammunition into the
province.

The ninth, that he collated informatioa
whether the king's subjects in Canada were
or wefe not well affected to hb government,
with intent to communicate it to the eneniy
for their aid and assistance.

The tenth, that he acquired knowle<ke of
the strength of the king's city called Moa-
treal, and of tfie means l>y'whicn it might be
invested by the enemy, with intent to coaBp>
municate it to the enemy, ibr tbeie vA and
a^i^tance., ^- .

mj

for High Treanfn*

A. D. 1707.

[754

The aieyenth, that, being possessed of the
informatioo and knowledge set forth In the
ninth and tenth overt acts, he, with intent to
communic&te them to theenemy, departed
from the parish of Quebec towardsforeign parts.

The twelfth, that after leaving the parish
of Quebec, he again returned to it, secretly
and clandestinely, under the assumed name
of Jacob Felt.

The thirteenth, that he conspired with di-
yers persons imknown, to seize, by surprise,
the walled and garrisoned city of Quebec, one
of his m^esty^ fortresses, to cause a mi-
aerable slaushter of his faithful subiects, and
to dehver the dty into the hantls of the
enemy, for their assistance in the prosecution
of the present war.

And the fourteenth avers, tliat on the tenth
day of Maj^ last he entered the city of Que-
bec, with intent to seise it by surprise, to
cause a miserable slaughter of the kine's
faithful' subjects, and, in order to assist the
enemy in the prosecution of the present war,
to deliver the dty into their hands.
. Such, gentlemen, are the outlines of each
particular overt act, which resolve into these
general facts;— That the prisoner, in concert
-with the kin^s enemie^ and others with
whom we are not at war, entered into a plan
for the destruction of his majesty's govern-
jnent in this province, by insunection and
invasion; that, to accomplish this object, he
endeavoured to engage in his design many of
our own subjects ana many of our neigbboars
in the northern parts of the states of New
York and Vermont; enlisted some; formed
a scheme to introduce into the province the
necessary arms and ammunition; and came
to Montreal from the United States of Ame-
ncsL in July and November last, in order to
0ttn intelligence respecting the strength of
that city ana the dispositions of the Can^ians
towards the king's government; that pos-
sessed of information on these points, by
which the future conduct of the plan was
to be governed, he went back to the United
States to communicate it to the French mi-
nister at.Philadeiphia. That in farther pro-
secution of the same plan, having conceived
it practicable to surprise the prison of Que-
l)ec, he was determined to visit it; for, being
on the spot, he could with more certainty
pdopt measures to accomplish this part of his
,design; that with these views, he returned
into the province, and came secretly to
,i)uebec in May last, having assumed the
name of Jacob Fblt, to prevent detection.
^ These, gentlemen, are strong facts, and it
1% a necessary inference to be drawn from
them that the intention of the prisoner was
treasonable^ If he has done the utmost in
^ power to cxdte a rebellion in Canada and
lo assist the republic4>f France in an intended
lawioD of a piurt of his miyesty's dominions,
with a view to depose him from hissovern-
inent, this is clearly treason ; not only com*
passing Uie death of the king, but an adbe-

yoL. XXVI,

rence to his enemies ; and if the averments
which the several overt acts contain are suli-
stantiated by evidence clear and satisfactory
to your minds, treason of each description
will be proved asainst the prisoner, and your
verdict must find him guilty.

Gentlemen, I am at this moment opening
to you the nature of the crime witli which the
prisoner is charged ; I shall in a few minutes
open the nature of tho evidence which wo
snail submit to you in support of the accusa-
tion against him. Till that evidence has been
heard by you, from the mouths of the wit-
nesses which we shall produce, I ask you
to suspend your judgment. It is not my wish
to exaggerate the offence which is laid against
the prisoner, nor is it my wish to infer, from
what I am g^ing to say, that he is guilty,
because he is accused of the comphcated
treason charged in the indictment ; till proved
to be suilty, he certainly stands entitled to
the full presumption oi innocence; but I
think myself justified in calling your atten-
tion to what must have been the siliiation
of the province and of us its inhabitants,
had the design imputed to the prisoner, suc-
ceeded but in part. If a rebellion had been
raised or an invasion attempted without suc-
cess, the horrors of war, a suspension of all
civil rishts, a daily and miserable apprehen-
sion 0? something vet worse to come, were
nevertheless unavoidable consequences. But
if the attempt had succeeded, what a scene
of inisery must have been opened— our pro-
perties, our lives, and, what is still more valur
able than either, the happy constitution of our
country, all that man can value in civil so-
ciety, all that attaches us to existence, our-
selves, our nearest and best connections, our
government, our religion, our rational liberty,
which we boast as British subjects, all must
have been laid at the mercy of the French
republic. — What that mercy is, the black an-
nals of the republic can best tell ; it is there
indelibly recorded for the horror and execra-
tion of posterity, in the blood of their lawful
sovereign, in the blood of their nobility, in
the blood of their clergy, in the blood of
thousands of the best and most innocent of
their citizens.

Gentlemen, the prisoner is generally sup-
posed to be a stranger to our country, a sub-
ject of the United States of America. I know
not the fact, nor do I know whether any at*>
tempt will be made to prove that he is so;
but be it as it may, it cannot avail him, no
question can be raised whether he U a na-
tive or a foreigner. The crime laid to h\%
charge is declared to have been comuiilted
withm his majesty's dominions, at the parish
of Quebec, within this province of Lower
Canada; it is immaterial therefore whether,
at the time the offence was committed, he
was a subject or an alien ; if the former, he
oweil to his majesty a natural and permanent
allegiance, if the latter he owed an allegiance
lotfld and temporary; and if he acted coatiary^

9 C

755]

37 GEORGE III.

Trial of David Madant

[756

to the duty of either, he is guilty of high
treason. Much has heretofore been said and
written on this point; but it is now (so far as
^►c arc concerned with it) most clearly settled*
as I have slated it. A philosopher may affect
to discover a greater degree of turpitude in
treason committed by a subject, who is bound
to support that society and government of
which he is a member, than in treason coni-
itiitted by an alien who has no tie of thai de-
scription ; but if he should, his opinion can
have no weight in a court of justice ; for, in
the scale of legal consideration no distinction
whatever can be found. In all instances
where we arc traitorously betrayed, what
country gave birth to the traitor, is a question
t^ very little importance; for whether he was
bom a subject or an alien, his treason and the
injury to the public remain the same.

Gentlemen, I shall not trouble you farther
with any general observations on the nature

in case of discovery. You wi)I find the same
declaration repeated to several other wit-
nesses.

Gentlemen, Barnard, not ktiowing the na-'
lure of his secret, advised him, if it was sa
dangerous, to keep it. The prisoner answered,
that he had made several enauiries respecting
him, and had been particularly recommended
to him as a man who might be trusted. He
required only a solemn promise that he would
not divulje what he should tell him. This
promise Barnard gave, and the prisoner then
told him that be was there (upon the provmce
Kne) for Uie purpose of bringing about a revo*
lution in Canada. That he wished for as->
sistance, and then pressed him to join in the
euterprizc ; which, however, he declined and
left him. He saw the prisoner a iew day»
afterwards in Montreal, and was again soli*
cited by him to join4iim, but refused. The
prisoner then reminded him of his promise.

ef the offence now before you, or the situation and told him that if he kept his secret he

of the prisoner, but shaH proceed to lay before
you, the substance of the evidence by which
the charges against him will be supported.
Of the present war existing between nis ma-
jesty and the persons exercisine the powers
of government in France, I snail not offer
any proof, it is a fact of public notoriety ; nor
shall I offer any particular evidence of the
different conspiracies charged in the first,
third, fourth, eighth, and thirteenth overt
acts. I shall rest them on the general testi-
mony which will be given ; for, the rule of
evidence on this point is, that the fact of con-
spiring need not be directly proved, but may
be collecled by the jury irom collateral cir-
cumstances. But to support the remaining
allegations of the indictment, I shall produce
seven witnesses. William Barnard, Elmer
Cushine, Francis Chandonet, Thomas Butter-
field, Charles Frichette^ John Black, and Her-
man Witsins Ryland.

Gentlemen, it is uncertain at what time
the prisoner first formed the idea of exciting
a revolution in Canada, it was probably pre-
vious to the period from which the evidence
commences; the first information, however,
^ which I am possessed, is dated in July
last, and you will now receive it from the
witness, William Barnard, whom I shall first
call. He saw the prisoner at the province
line, in July last, but was not acquainted with
liis person ; it seems, however, the prisoner

should be protected. Gentlemen, Mr. Bar*
nard is a British subiect, and finding that the
prisoner was seriously and systematically en-
deavouring to excite a revolution, he gave im-
mediate information to a magistrate (Mr.
Macord), and from that moment the eye of
government, unseen by the prisoner, has con-
stantly been fixed upon him. Mr. Maccord
advised Mr. Barnard to get from the prisoner
whatever information be could respecting his
views. — ^The prisoner appears to have lef^
Montreal shortly after the last conversation
with Barnard, for^ he did hoi see him acatn
till the month of November last; he theti
met him at La Prairie, near Montreal. The
prisoner recognised him, pressed him aeain
to join him, and as an inducement, told nim
that thing^s were ripening haX ; that Canada
was already ii conquered country; thataFrendi
army and fleet would be in the river earl^ itk
the SiTring. He asked him to sound the minds
of the people, and to let him know yfYix^
might be depended upon; Barnard declbied.
The prisoner then told him that if he wotdA
engage 16 let him know where the property
of the seminary and of the principal mer*>
chants at Montreal was deposited, he fhould
at all events be protected. This was th'e last
interview which he had with Barnard; ii
happened, I think, on the 7th of Ntjvember.
Gentlemen, the next witness whom I pro^
pose to call is, Elmer Cushing ; and his tes*

knew him well, for he cameup to nim and | timony is Important, as it goes to estlbHsb not
told him that he wished to have some private ' only the prisoner's general intentidn, but wbo
conversation with him. Barnard walked a , were his employers. Voii will see fh>hi hf»
little way with him upon the shore of the ' deposition, that when Mr. Barnard saw the
lake, and the prisoner began his conversation | prisoner at La Prairie, he was just return^
by informing nim that he had something of from a second visit to Montreal. _The ]^-

importance to communicate to him, that it
was a secret ; that by telling it, he put his life
into his hands. — I cannot out remark to you
here,, that whenever the prisoner has com-
municated his design he has expressed him-
self sensible of its treasonable nature, by
avowing that his life was certainly forfeited

soner came to the American coffiee-faouse,
kept by Mr. Cushing at Jifontrcal, on the
fifth of^ November last.^He went out^Kfter
breakfast, and was absent lietween four and
^vt hours. Upon his return,' Mr. Cnshmg^
who had kbown him for several ycftu^, oS-
scfved, thai his cloatfas were covered witb

7573

Jor High Treason,

A. D. 1797.

[75S

small burrs^ and asked him where he had
been ; he said upon the mountain. They had
a little colLversation together, and upon Cush-
ing's expressing some rears respecting the loy-
alty of the Canadians, tiie prisoner desired to
speak with hiib in private : they went into a
back room» and he then told him, as he had
before told Barnard, that he had a secret to
communicate which, if known, would take
bis life ; and he required of him an oath of se-
crecy, which, aAer some conversation, was
taken by Mr. Gushing. The prisoner then
Informed him, that he was employed by Mr.
Adet the minister of the French republic at
Philadelphia, to promote an intended invasion
of Canada in the Spring, by a fleet, and an
army of ten thousand men, to be assisted by
ibe Canadians. He farther told him that he
had something in his possession which would
convince him that he was employed in the
"business, and produced from between the
soles of an old snoe, which he took from his
^ddle-bazs, a paper, signed ** Adet," which
certified that he (Mr, Adet) was interested in
the family concerns of the prisoner. This, he
informed him, was intentionally written in an
^obscure style. It could not, he said, if it
were found upon him. be produced in evi«-
iSence against him. Gentlemen, those who
are conversant in the Stale Trials, will recol-
lect many instances similar to this. A law-
suit, commerce, and family concerns have
Jbeen frequently used as disguises to conceal a
treasonable design.* — ^Thc prisoner told Mr.
Gushing, that he was then going to Phila-
delphia, to communicate to Mr. Adet, the in-
formation of which he was already possessed,
and should probably proceed to France, but
should certainly revisit Canada in the Spring.
He told him thai it was proposed to attack
IQuebec and Montreal at tiie same time, and
that he in person should command against
the latter. He informed him that he was
jthen returped from the mountain, which, he
found, commanded the city entirel v ; that he
had visited every part of it (certainly, <;entlc-
men, in conteniplationof that commancFwhich
.was promised bim). The prisoner has known
Mr. Gushing for several years, and he seems.
from this oausei to have been more explicit
with him than he was with Barnard. He told
him they meant to seize all property in the
bands ol those who should be adverse to their
views, with which the expense of the expedi-
.tion would be defrayed. That it was their in-
.tention, in the first instance, effectually to
flecure the priests and leading characters of
the province, that it would indeed fare hard
]witli all who were not favourable to their
cause. He farther informed him, that he had
(Engaged sever^ persons in the scheme, who
.were resident near the Province line, who had

. • See the trial of the Reverend W. Jackson,
fintLvoi. 25, p. 783; and the trial of Stone,
ja the same volume, p. 1155, and particu-
larly pp. 1591 and Hi^

undertaken to«nlist a certain number of men
each. That the arms and ammunition for
these persons, and for the Canadians who
should join, would be furnished from France,
through the Uuited States of America. He
warmly pressed Mr. Gushing to encage in the
cause, which he declined. He asked him to
give information of the state of the country
trom time to time, till the Spring, which he
refused to do. He then told him, that the
opposition which some persons were then
making against the Road act was very inju-
rious to his undertaking, and proposed that
Mr. Gushing should use his influence to keep
the inhabitants quiet till the Sprin|^ promising
him protection if he would. Mr. Gushing told
him in answer that he could have nothnig to
do with him. The prisoner upon this, find-
ing that he could not succeed in iiis attempt to
induce him to join in the rebellion, menaced
him with immediate death, if he divulged his
secret. He advised him to reflect seriously
on what he had said, and added that he might
perhaps send some person to converse with
him on the subject in the course of the Win-
ter. That if he did send any body, he woult)
tell Mr. Gushing that he was come to talk
with him on family matters. Mr. Gushing^
very soon after this conversation, gave infor-
mation to government.

Gentlemen, what I have stated is Uie sub-
stance of what passed between Mr. Gushing
and the prisoner ; and you will observe that iu
these conversations with Barnard and Gushing
you have evidence of the general design (of
subveiting the goveTiunentby an invasion and
rebellion) charged iu t he first, second, third and
fourth overt acts ; of his having solicited two
of the king's subjects (for Mr, Gushing is also
one of our subjects) to join in his undertaking,
which is the charge in the fifth overt act ; gf
Jiis collecting intelligence respecting the loy-
alty of the king^s subjects, and the strength
of the city of Montreal, and leaving the pro-
vince to communicate il to the enemy, which
arc the charges contained in the ninth, tenth,
and eleventh overt acts. In the conversation
with Mr. Gushing, the prisoner makes men-
tion of arms and ammunition, to be intro-
duced into the country, through the United
States, from France. The next witness, Fran-
cis Ghandonct, will detail to you the mode in
which he proposed to get them into Ganada
clandestinely. It seems that the prisoner left
La Prairie, about the seventh or eighth of No-
vember, and proceeded towards Philadelphia,
to communicate the result of his inquiries and
observations made in Ganada, to Mr. Adet.
He met Mr. Ghandonet upon his way, at a
place within the United States, but near to our
province line. He wished, he told him, to
speak with him in private. When alone, be
informed Mr. Ghandonet that he had a secret
of the utmost importance to communicate to
bim, and asked a promise of secrecy, which
was refused. The observation of the pri-
soner's answer was this, that he could nut

759]

87 GEORGE III.

Trials of David Mafiane

[760

suppose Mr. Chandonet would be accesary to
the' takiog of his life, and thai he would
therefore go on ; he then told him that he
was employed by the French, and had been
in Canada to learn, whether the inhabitants
were well or ill-affected to his majesty's go-
vernment. This, gentlemen, is direct proof
upon the ninth overt act He told Mr. Chan-
donet farther, that he wished to introduce
arms and ammunition into Canada, concealed
in rafts of lumber, and pressed him to carry
in some in rafts of firewood from his farm at
Saint Regis, upon the river Saint Lawrence,
which, he said, would be supposed to be
rafts coming from Upper Canada, and conse-
quently would not be suspected. This, gen-
tlemen, is proof as strone as any that can be
adducea in support of tne eighth overt act.
Mr. Chandonet declined the proposal. The

Erisoner expressed his sorrow, and begged
im not to betray him ; observing, that iihe
(Mr. Chandonet) divulged what he had told
him, he (the prisoner) roust inevitably be
hanged.

Gentlemen, Mr. Chandonet is an Ameri-
can subject ; and as the prisoner solicited him
to join in the projected revolution, you have
in his testimony, evidence also upon the sixth
overt act. But to support it still farther, and
to prove the seventh overt act, I shall exa-
mine Thomas Butterfield. This evidence is
an accomplice and a subject of the United
States. He first saw the prisoner at Swan ton,
in the State of Vermont, in November last ;
the prisoner told him, as he had told all the
other witnesses, that he had been in Canada
to feel the pulse of the inhabitants, to learn
if they were willing to throw off the British
government. That he was employed for this
purpose by Mr. Adet, the French minister, and
was then returning to him at Philadelphia, to
let him know the result of the intelligence he
had acquired in this province. That he meant
to return to Canada in the Spring to prosecute
the businesss in which he was enpged, and
solicited him to join in the enterpnze^ which
he (Butterfield) engaged to do : this is direct
proof of the sixth and seventh overt acts. It
seems that the prisoner, at this time, enter-
tained an idea or taking the garrison of Que-
bec by surprise, for he mentioned it to But-
terfield.— About the middle of April last, true
to his intention of returning to Canada in the
Spring, he went again to Butterfield's house,
seemed to be apprehensive that he was dis-
covered, and declined coming into the pro-
vince till he had seen one Charles Frichette,
a Canadian. Butterfield came to Saint John's
at the prisoner's request, for Frichette, and
carried him to Swanton, where the prisoner
conversed with him, and then determined not
only to come into the province, but to proceed
lo Quebec. Before he left Swanton he told
Butterfield that his (Butterfield's) pay should
commence from November last^ when he
first engaged, and at parting informed him,
that his intention was, to proceed to Quebec,

to see whether and in what manner lbs gar*
rison might be taken by surprise.

Gentlemen, the next witness to be pro-
duced on the part of the crown is Charles
Frichette, anotner accomplice, and a British
subject. His evidence will go, generally, to
support the overt acts which char^ the pri-
soner with the design of subvertmg his ma-
jesty's government, and engaginjg his subjects
to rise m rebellion ; but more pomtedly to the
twelf\h, thirteenth, and fourteenth overt acts.
When he first saw the prisoner, which was
in July, 1796, the prisoner endeavoured to

Erevail on him, to procure a certificate, signed
y six or more Canadians, of this import, tha€
they were dissatisfied with the British go-^
vernroent, and wished to be under the French
republic, which he decliqed. An oath of
secrecy was previously required finom him by
the prisoner, which he took. Frichette went
to Swanton in April last, in consequence of
the prisoner's messase by Butterfield. He
saw the prisoner, who expressed his fears
about entering the province, but beine in^
formed that he was not detected, he deter-
mined to come in ; he did so, in company
with Frichette, and proceeded to Qyebec by
the South Shore- road ; but, being apprehen-
sive of a discovery, be assumed the name of
Jacob Felt. At Saint Nicholas, the prisoner
asked him, if he thought the Canadians ripe
for a revolution, and after farther conversa-
tion added, that he was a general in the ser-
vice of the French republic, and came to de-
liver the Canadians from the British govern-
ment ; that he had formed a design of taking
the garrison of Quebec by surprise, and was
then on his way for that purpose ; that five
hundred men, armed with pikes of wood,
hardened in the fire, and headed with iron,
by pursuing his idea, might effect it. On the
tenth of May they crossed from Saint Nicholas
to Wolfs Cove, where the prisoner concealed
himself in the woods, and sent Frichette into
town to bring Mr. Black, the member of the
provincial parliament, to him, which he did.
The prisoner had a long conversation with
Mr. Black upon the means of exciting a revo-
lution, and of taking Quebec by surprise. At
the desire of the prisoner and of Mr. Black, ho
conducted the pnsoner to Mr. Black's house
in Quebec, the same evening.

Gentlemen, I must here recall your atten-
tion to the declaration of the prisoner, that
he should revisit Canada in the Spring, for
the purpose of carrying his design into eie-
cution. To this second visit and its eeneral
and special intention, both Butterfield and
Frkhette, are witnesses. Their evidence will
be indisputably confirmed by that of Mi*.
Black. He will inform you that he went to
Wolfs Cove in consequence of the message
which he received by Frichette, where he
found the prisoner; that he had a long con-
versation with him, in the course of which
the prisoner entered fully into his design.
He meant, he said, to excite the Caaadbna

7611

fit High Trioion*

to take up arms a^inst the gjovernmenty to
cDgaee «t first a few men of influence^ who
should! proTide others, to be joiued od a cer-
taia dav to be appointed, by many already
engaged in the United States of America, to
the number often thousand, who would inter
the province under various pretences. He
proposed his idea of takins the garrison of
Quebec by surprise, which he thought prac-
ticable ; he meant, be repeated, to use pikes of
eight feet in length, maae of wood, hardened
in the fire, and neaded with iron, and added,
that he did not wish to take a life, but that
all who resisted must fall. He was, he said,
employed by Mr. Adet, who was about to
leave Philadelphia for France on the seventh
of April, when he left it in order to procure
the French troops who were to co-operate in
the conquest of the province. Wnen Mr.
Black first saw the prisoner, he understood
that his name was Felt; but afUrwards, in
conversation from himself, and by a letter
which the prisoner gave him from a Mr.
Hunsden, he found tluit bis name was David
Maclane.

Gentlemen, a much longer conversation
than tliat which I have related, passed be-
tween Mr. Black and the prisoner, which you
will receive from him ; I shall only remark,
that towards the conclusion Mr. Black pressed
faim to come to his house that evenmg, to
which the prisoner reluctantly agreed, ex-

Eressing his fears of detection. He promised,
owever, to come after dark. Mr. Black re-
turned to town, and made a deposition of all
that had passed, before a magistrate, in con-
sequence of which the prisoner was appre-
hended at Mr. Black's house the same
evening.

Gentlemen, I shall call Mr. Rylaad to
a sinele point; to substantiate the fact
chat the prisoner, to conceal the name of
Maclane (too dangerous to be avowed), per-
severed in the assumed appellation of Jacob
Felt, even after he was apprehended. His
evidence will establish the twelfth overt act,
lieyood a doubt.

Gentlemen, I have endeavoured to lay be-
fore vou an accurate outline of the testimony
which wiH be given by the several witnesses,
whom we shalfproduce. I have not, I trusL
-said any thine which relates to facts that will
not be proved; but if I have been so unfortu-
nate in any instance, I must request you not
to pav any attention to it; what is not
proved by legal evidence you must totally
Tcgect.

Gentlemen, the inference to be drawn from
the Several overt acts charged in the indict-
ment, must be drawn by you upon the evi-
dence which we offer. You are to decide
whether the prisoner is guilty or innocent j
whether the overt acts are supported by proof,
and whether they are sufficient evidences of a
treasonable intent On this bead you wili-per-
iMt me to remark, that no particular descrip-
tioiM»f overt acts ia^ required to support an

A. D. I79r. [7fil

indictment for treason. All measures what^i
ever, which manifest the treasonable inten-
tion are overt acts ; even words, jgentlemen,
may be proofs of treason, esoecially when
coupled with acts. Loose words, not reUuive
to any act or dnigny I admit are not so ; but
words of advice or persuasion, and consultap
tions for traitorous purposes, certainly are:
This is a rule which our criminal writers have
adopted, and among them the humane sir
Micnael Foster : — ^ l^ey are uttered^ says he,
ill eontemptatian of some traitoroui purpote oe-
tually on foot or intended, and in prosecution of
it J' brohasan's case is strongly to this noint ;
he was at Lisbon, and declared he would kill
the king of England. Here were words
spoken in contemplation of a treasonable de-
sign, and coupled with acts. The indict-
ment set forth his declaration at Lisbon, and
that he came to England on purpose to put it
in execution. The jury thought so, and Cro«
hagan was convicted. So, m the present
case, all the conversations of the prisoner are
woras of persuasion and advice, spoken in
contemplation of a treasonable aesign of
subvertmg the king's government, in prose-
cution of It, and coupled with acts; particu-
larly with repeated visits to the province.

Gentlemen, I shall not trouble you fiirther
on this point of evidence, but I must be per-
mitted to advert to the exeellent and learned
charge given to the Grand Inquest, at the
openmg of- this special commission, which
clearly recognised the principle for which I
contend, ** that words relative to a traitorous
design, actually on foot, and coupled with
acts, are proou of treason.'' Li the same
chai^ it was stated, from the principles of
several adjudged cases, that if any person in
the employ of the king*s enemies, should
declare an intention of coming into the pro-
vince with a design of promoting an insurrec-
tion, or to surprise one of the king's for-
tresses, or to deliver any part of the pro-
vince into the hands of the enemy, and should
afterwards actually come in with such inten-
tion, his conduct would be an overt act of ad-
herence, and amount to the crime of Hish
Treason. This declaration is too strongly
applicable to the case before you to allow a
comment on my part.

Gentlemen, it is not m^ province to stale
to you theiaw upon the prisoner's case ; thai
you will receive in the progress of the trial
from much higher and most certain authority.
I have been necessarily led into some obser-
vations upon the law, relative to overt acts,
and to what I have alreadjr saidf; with the per-
mission of the Court, I will add, that as the
statute of treasons contemplates the king's
civil, asjwell as natural death, all conspiracies,
all measures to depose him, and every act
tending to subject his dominions to a forei^
power, are overt acts of compassing his
death. This is a broad base for the support
of the first count in the present indictment
The foundation of tlia second coMUt is equally

T63]

S7 GEOEGIi III.

Trial qf David Madane

efttensiye; for eferj attempt wbatover to aid
and assist the king's ODemies ia the prosecu-
tion of a war agaiost hicn, whether successful
w otherwise, is aa overt act of adhereace.
These are principles which I must humbly
hope, the Court will sanction and confirm.
Gentlemen, I trust we shall la^ before you
dear and full. proof of all the overt acts
charged in the indictment^ yet permit me to
remark to you what has been often ruled,
that if ooe of them only is established by two
nvknessesy or two of them bv one witness to
each, whose tetUmony you believe, the evi-
dence wiU be sufficient. The prisoner will
not then be entitled to the resumption of
innocence. The criipe of high treason will
atand proved against him, and your verdict,
on tlie oath you have taken, according to the
duty yon owe to God, to your sovereign, your
country and yourseWes roost be, that he is
Gdiltt injoatuier and form as he stands in-
dk^ed.

EVIDBSCE POR TKzCjSOWK.

Mr. Wiiliam Barnard swom.ȣxamined by
Mr. Attorney General,

Do you know the prisoner P-^I do.

How long have you known him?— ^iace
July 1706.

Where did ycm first see him ? — In the state
of Vecmont, luit near the Province Line.

Had you anv coovectation with him?-^I
had a good deal.

Mr. Aitm'ney GeneraL^Fny give an ac-
count lof it?

Mr. Pjf/be.— If your honours will permit us,
niw object to this evidence ; the overt acts are
all laid to have been committed in the parish
of Quebec, and they ofier evidence of convert
eatioa which passed in Vermont

Mr. Attorney Ge»era/.»«-Thi8 objection was
token ia LayePsoase, and it waA there saidia
answer to it,*^^ We are entitled to give evi*
dence of overt acts of the same species of
\ treason wherever committed, provided we
also pnove one in the county laid ia the in-
dictment; which we must do, otherw)s^ what
we BOW prove, will pass for nothing.'^* — I of-
fer this as an answer 1o the objection sow
taken, because it was heU to be sufficient
sfi the case I now cite.

Chirf Jciifaee.— It certainly is a sufficient
answer. Whatever overt acts you prove,
oomoutted out of the oounly of Quebec, can-
not avail you, if you do not prove an oveat
act within that county. Go on.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL^-^ive an accoaatof
what passed between you and the prisoner ia
Juhr last,ai the Province Line.
. Witwu^-^Ou toy arrival at the house
where the prisoner was, near the Proviace
Xine, it«vas neariy dark ; he tokl me he wish-
ed to have Bome oonversation with n^e. I
stepped aaide with hiai, as he desired aot to

|;764

^MMriMAi

>«.«a^

f^-^m*

^ S(nt6LiA,f.l6i.

speak in the presence of other persons: we
walked down to the shore of the lake. The
prisoner then addressed himself to me, say-
ing, he had something of great importance to
cummunicate, in the doipgof wbicn he should
put his life into mv hands : I desired him not
to do it. He told me that I might perhaps
think it sineular that a stranger should ad-
dress himself to me in that way ; but that
was not so much the case as I might imagine ;
for, although he was a stranger to me, yet I
was not so to him ; he then mentioned some
circumstances tliat happened to me before I
came into this province to reside, by which I
knew that he had taken some psuns to fiqd
me out

Proce^ ?— He told me that I had been re*
commended to him as a person to whom he
might entrust a secret: he desired that I
would not divulge it; which I promised, if it
should be nothing against me. He then told
me that his business there was, to bring about
a revolution in Canada, and that the Cana-
dians would have every thing done for them
for that purpose.

Did any thing farther pass between you I —
Yes. He went on and said, that he wanted
some person to take the lead in the business,
to carry it into execution; and if I would uxt-
dertake it, my fortune should be made.

At what time was this ? — It was in the even*
ing, on or about the S9th July 1796.

Go on, if you please f — I then asked him
who had recommended him to me, which he
refused to tell. I told him it could be no
friend of mine, for no friend would do it ; that
it was a plot of some enemy of mine to ruin
me : that he was mistaken m his man, and I
turned away from him. He then desired that
I would not say any thine about it.

Did he say any thing about Montreal ?— Ho
said he should be at Montreal in a few days^
and perhaps I might think better of it.

Did you afterwards see him at Montreal?—
I did ; I saw him in Montreal, about four or
five days afterwards ; he accosted me in the
street, and asked me if I had thought any
farther on what he bad said to me at the
Lines ; I told him I had not thought much
about it. He said that, when I came to know
who he was, I should think differently ; that
if I, would not take an active part, yet if I
would conceal the matter I should be protect-
ed. Of these conversations I imm^iately in-
formed Mr. Maccord, one of the magistrates
at Montreal.

Did you see the prisoner at any time after-
wards ? — Yes, Sir. I was at La Prairie, a vil-
lage about three leagues above Montreal, oa
tlM opposite side of the river, about the se-
venth of November last, where I saw the pri-
soner again.. I had seeu him a few days be#
fore at Montreali but had no conversation with
him.

Had you any briber conversation at La
Praine with the prisoner ?-^I had. He said
I must then think differently of the busi^iesi

765]

far High Treason.

A. D. 1797.

[766

^in what I had done hefore ; I replied that
it was true there had heen some disturhances
that looked something like what he had talk*
ed ahout. He said those disturbances were
very much against their cause ; that he had
been at Montreal, where he learnt that sus-

ficions were entertained against him; he said
must have occasioned tliem ; for, I was the
only person to whom he had spoken on the
subject.

What answer did you make ?•— I told him.
that after I had seen him at the lines, I had
mentioned the matter to Mr. Maccord, but
had not mentioned his name ; he said he was
very sorry for it, and that I must be more
cautious m future.

Did he tell you any thing farther ?^He
told me that I might depend on it this was a
conquered country : that there would be an
army here in the Sprine, and if he could de-
peno upon me, he would tell me something
farther. That he wished me to take an ac-
tive nart in the business. I told him I
ahoula not take an active part, nor should I
make any other promises than I had done.

Did he say any thins about the Seminary
of Montreal ? — He said I could make inqui-
ries where the seminary kept their money:
and that he likewise wishea to be informed
who the principal merchants were, and in
what part of their houses they kept their cash ;
that, if I would do so, I should be protected ;
that he wished me to sound the people's
minds, and learn who would be likely to op-
pose them, and that I should use my mfluence
to keep the Canadians quiet during the Win-
ter, so that there might ne no disturbances.

Did he tell you when the proposed attack
would be made? — ^Not i^articularly, but he
Baid, the blow would be struck at once in the
Sprine, at a time when it would not be ex-
pected; that they (the prisoner*s party) should
wish to confine all those that would be against
them : but did not wish to take any person's
life.

What other conversation passed between
vou? — None, sir; the prisoner appeared to
be a little dubious of me, which, i supoose,
f>revented him from explaining bimseit far-
ther.

Mr. William Barnard crosa-eiamioed by Mr.

Pyke.

Did you receive any promise or reward
'fVom government when you gave your infor-
mation ? — ^Noue.

Chief Justice. — ^That question has been al-
lowed ; but I think it was an improper one.

Mr. Pyke, — ^When you were at La Prairie,
did you not offer to conduct the prisoner out
of the province ? — ^No,

Did you not follow the prisoner from Mont-
real to La Prairie ?-^No, I was there first.

Did you not go there for the purpose of
meeting the prisoner P — I had other business
bat that mane a part, in order to get farther
informationi by desire of Mr. Maccord.

II

Do you know the prisoner to be a subject
of the United States ?^I do not know any
farther than that he said he was.

One of the Jury. — I bee the witness may be
asked by what name he first knew the priso-
ner.

Witnesi. — I did not know the prisoner's
name first; I afterwards found it was Mac-
lane.

Elmer Gushing sworn. — Examined by Mr.
Mtorney Generals

Are you a British or an American subject ?
— I am a subject of this government.

How lone have you known the prisoner?
— I have known him about ten or eleven
years.

Do you recollect to have spen the prisoner
last Autumn, and where ? — He came to my
house, the American coffee-house, a tavern,
which I then kept, at Montreal, on the fifth
of November last, in the morning, before
breakfast; I was absent when he came: on
my return home, which was ahout ten o'clock,
one of the witnesses here present informed
me, that he had taken his breakfiist and was
gone out: he returned about three or four
o'clock.

Were you struck with* any thing about his
cloaths when he returned ?— Yes, sir ; I ob-
served that his cloaths were covered with
small burrs, and asked him where he had been
to eet so many upon him ; he answered that
he had been upon the mountain of Montreal.
I remarked to him that he had been a long
time gone ; he answered, that he had been on
every part of the mountain, and he thought
it commanded the greatest prospect he ever
saw, and might be made a place of great com-
mand over Montreal, in case of a war.

Mr. Attorney Oenera/.— I do not wish to
interrupt you, eo on, if you please.

Witness. — ^Tne conversation then tinned
upon the then situation of this country ; in
the course of which, I observed to him, that
the Canadians had made considerable disturb-
ances, and seemed to be disaffected. Imme-
diately upon that, he told me he wished to
have a little private conversation with me :
we retired into a bapk room, where he in-
formed me that he had a secret which he
wished to impart to me; that it was a matter
of the utmost consequence, and that he could
not communicate it unless I would swear
never to reveal it.

What was your answer f— I told him that I
considered my word always sufficient to keep
a secret, without an oath ; he said he could
not reveal it upon m^ bare word, and I re«
plied that I dici not wish to know it.

What reason did he assign for requiring an
oath of secrecy?— He said he could not com-
municate it without my swearine, because he
was putting his life into my hands.

Proceed?— I told him that my concealing
the secret might be detrimental to me, in
which case I could not conceal it : he replied

767]

37 GEORGB III.

Trial of David Madane

[768

be would endeavour to make h advantageous
to m€» as he should have it in his power; I
then told him that I would conceal it in case
it should not prove detrimental to me in per-
son or property ; that I would, at any rate,
conceal his name; and I made accordingly a
solemn promise to that effect.

What passed after your promise of secrecy ?
— He informed me that there would be a se-
vere attack upon this province, early in the
•Spring, which would at once overthrow the
present existing government; that he had
been employed m forwarding the plan, ever
since he had been in and about this country,
and was so employed still ; that the attack
would be made by a fleet from France, which
would bring from ten to fifteen thousand land
forces.

There was I believe, at that time, a French
ieet upon the coast ? — It was so reported.

Did he speak of that French neet? — ^He
did ; he observed that the fleet then upon the
coast, was part of the fleet destined for the
purpose ; but that the season was too late.

Did the prisoner show you any papers? —
He informed me that he was employed by
the French minister at Philadelphia, and that
he had something with him that would con-
vince me that he was not actine without au-
thority. He went to his saddle-bags, took
out a pair of shoes, one of which hwA a hole
worn through the outside sole near the toe,
and pulled a paper out from between the two
soles, which was signed << Adet.'' The paper
was written in the English language, in an
obscure style, purporting that he (Adet) was
interested in th6 family concerns of David
Maclane.

Had you any conversation upon this paper ?
— ^I asked him why the paper was written in
such an obscure style; to which he answered
that it was a dangerous piece of business to go
upon ; that if he should have the misfortune
to be apprehended, and the paper should be
found upon him, it could not be produced in
evidence against him.

What farther passed respecting this paper?
— He said the paper was drafted by himself;
and that Mr. Aaet would have signed any
other, but he (the prisoner) thought this the
safest way in which he' could write it: there
was no occasion for a regular commission, he
said, until matters came to the test.

If I understand you right the prisoner came
to your house, as a traveller. Did he tell
you where he came from ?— He informed me
that he was then immediately from the French'
minister at Philadelphia, and should immedi-
ately return thither, where he should receive
his orders, and then sail for France; that he
should return to Montreal in the Spring, by
the way of New York, in order to take the
command in that quarter.

Had you any discourse about the intended
attack ?— I asked him in what manner the at-
tack was to be made ; he answered that the
Attack was to be made at Quebec and Mont- 1

I real at one and the same thno ; that the first
object would be to secure the money and va-
luable property, for defraying the expenses of
the war, and then efiectually to secure all the
priests and leading characters in the province ;
that those who were favourable to the cause
would be protected in person and property,
but as to those who were adverse to it, it
would fare hard with them. He said he
should have a number of persons under him
at Quebec^ at the time of the attack, whom he
meant to get into the province on rafls, or ir¥
any other way that he could, that they would
be there for the purpose of exciting discon-
tent and mutinies within the garrison, and fo»
spiking the cannony if possible, at the time of
tne attack.

What did he say respecting the Canadians?
"^He said he did not expect to need the assis-
tance of the Canadians before the first blow
was struck.

Who did you understand was to command
against Montreal ?— The prisoner told me that
he himself was to command against Mont-
real.

Had you any conversation respecting arms
and ammunition f — We had; he told me that
arms and ammunition were to be furnished
from France through the United States, by
the French minister Adet, for the attack at
Montreal.

Did you understand that any persons were
already engaged in the business ? — I did, se-
veral : the pnsoner told me that he had many
people near the Lines in the States, who had
already engaged to furnish him with a num-
ber of men each, who were to come in and as-
sist in the attack agstinst Montreal, he said
that I might be assured this was a conquered
country ; that the French were determined to
have it either by conquest or treaty.

Did he appear solicitous to engace you to
assist him in any way? — Very mucn so; he
first desired me to take an active part in the
business, promising that if I would, I should
have any reward I might ask, or any standing
in the service I might choose to accept of. I
told him that I could not make him any pro-
mises of that kind, for I should have nothing
to do with it, he then said that if I would give
every information I could, respecting the
state of the country, I should be protected in
person and property. I still told him that I
should not make him any promises, nor have
any Uiing to do with it, either one way or an-
other. He then said to me, '< You can cerr
tainly do thus much, — ^you can endeavour to
keep the Canadians quiet till the Spring ; for
these disturbances on account of the road act,
are very detrimental to the cause : I have,*'
says he, '* at this time a number engaged for
that purpose."

What disturbances?— There were disturlv
ances at that time in Montreal, respecting the
execution of the road act. Several persona
were violently ouposed to it. The prisoner^ I
conceive, aliudea to them.

760]

Jot High Treason.

A. D. mi.

[770

:^ Oo on if you pl^se ?^He then told me that
lie hud gone as far with me as he could go,
^intill should promise to join and take an ac-
tive part, but if I engaged to take au active
party he had other matters of great importance
to relate to me.

Did the prisoner remind you of your oath of
secrecy ? — lie did, and said that if I ever re*
vealed what he had communicated^ it should
fare hard with meithat my life would be taken
immediately.

What did the prisoner say to you as you
left the room, where the conversation which
ymt have related took place ? — lie observed
that I might alter my mind, perhaps, and that
* be might during the winter, send some per-
son to converse with me ; that if any one
should come, and tell mc he came to talk
-with me on family matters, that would be the
man, and I might then depend upon not
being deceived.

JElmer Cut/ung cros9-examincd by Mr. Pyke.

' Did not you come to Quebec in November
last, to give information against the prisoner ?
k^l gave information respecting a plot against
government ; but I did not mention the pri-
soner's natne.

Did you not obtain a promise of a township
of land as a reward? — I have a promise of a
township, but not as a reward fur any infor-
mation which I ever gave against the pri-
soner.

- Is it not on account of that promise that
you now come to give your evidence ? — ^No,
It is not: I have been served with a subpoena,
and I should have come if I had not obtained
a promise of a township.

Is the prisoner a British or an American
subject ?— rWhen I first knew him, about
eleven years ago, he resided at Providence in
Rhode Island. He is generally reputed an
American subject.

FrancU Chandanet sworn. — Examined by Mr.
Attorney Generat.

Are you a British subject ?— No, sir ; I am
a subject of the United States.

Do you know the prisoner at the bar? —
Yes, I do.

Inform the Court and jury how you firi^t
became acquainted with him?— I saw the
prisoner the first time at Watson's tavern last
summer, a little below the Isle Aux Noix ;
and some time in the beginning of the winter
I saw hint again ; he came across the Lake to
a place about three quarters of a league above .
the lines, within the United States : he met
me on the bank of the Lake, and asked me if
my name was not Chandoneti I answered,
ves. He asked ma to take a little Walk with
him, for that he had something to communi-
cate to me in jirivate, which I consented to.

What did he tell you in the course of your
'Walk ?— He told me that he was there upon
business of the utmost importance, and that I
bad been recommt nded ta him as a proper

VOL. xxn.

person to assist him, if I would take a part in
It; but before he could relate the matttik*. to
me, I must engage not to divulge it.

EKd'you make him any promise of se-
cresy ? — No, sir, I told him I could not make
such a promise till I knew what the matter
was i he said the business was of a political
nature, and that he could not relate it until I
had promised, which I again refused to do.

What followed ? — After a short pause, he
'said, he supposed I would not be accessary in
taking away a man's life, and that he would
therefore go on with the conversation: he
then told me that he was emploved by the
French to go into Canada to sound the minds
of the people, and to see how they were
afiected to the present government; which
business he had already beguii, and had found
a lai^ body of the Canadians could be raised
to make an insurrection in the country ; that
he had learnt I was going to five on the river
St. Lawrence, at a village railed St. Reeis,
within the state of New York, and a few
leagues above Montreal, which, he thought
would be a veiy suitable place to have such a
person as me, if I would assist him to carry oa
a plan.

Did he tell ^ou what plan ? — He did ; he
told me that this plan was, to secrete a quan-
tity of arms and ammunition on rafts of wood
in the spring of the year, to be brought into
the province both by lake'Champlain and
the river St. Lawrence ; that he thought a
quantity might likewise be concealed m the
rafts of firewood that are made in the ChateaU-
guay river; and that these would be the
saf<^t, in as much as it . would be supposed
they were coming from Upper Canada.

Do you recollect any conversation respect-
ing the prisoner's brother? — ^I do. The pri-
soner told me, that he hsui a brother who
was coming to the Lines with a large quan-
tity of dry goods : that these dry goods were
for the purpose of collecting a store of provi-
sions to be ready when tne insurrection in
Canada should take place, and that it would
furnish a good excuse for him to be backwards
and forwards, as he could visit his brother's
store without being suspected.

Did he ask you to join him ?^ — ^He pushed
very hard upon me to take part with him.

Did you agree to take a part ? — I refused ;
and declined having any thin^.to do with
him. He told me he was sony I would not.

Did he desire you to be secret ?— Yes, sir,
he did ; and added, that if I divulsed what he
had told me, he must inevitably be hanged.
He left me immediately after.

Francii Chandanet cross-examined by Mr.

Francklin.

How long have you known the prisoner ?—
About eleven months. I did not at* first
know his name.

Do you know hnn to be a subject of the
United Sutes ?--*I do not kooiw whether ho is
or is not

8 D .

77is]

37 6K0RGE IIL

Trud ofDa^ Mu^Utm

t77»

Art jou not a Canfulian by birth ?— Ym. | <— He did, he told me be wasempbyed bjr the
Why theado you call yourself an American I Erench minister or agent, ** Adet."

subject P-^I left the province with the Ame-
ricans in the year 1776, having the promise
of a commission in the army : I was after-
wards naturalized in the United States.

Bid you not come into the province last
winter, and were you not sent out b^^ a pro-
clamation from the governor on suspicion of
being a person disafiected to government ^^-^
I was sent out of the province as being dxt
alien.

When did you first give information against
the prisoner ? — "LsAi wmter.

Did not the expectation of beine permitted
to return into the province, in order to go to
your farm in Upper Canada, induce you to
give information against him? — No; being
conscious of my innocence, I wrote a letter
from the lines to Mr. Richardson^ the magis-
trate, at Montreal, telling him that it was my
intention to go to Upper Canada, and that I
was ready to take my trial upon any charge
that might be brought against me ; some time
after I came again iiiio the province, and was
then subpoenaed to ^ive evidence against the
prisoner.

ThamoM Butterfield, sworn.

Mr. Pyke,^^The attorney general, in his
opening, has stated that this witness is an
accomplice. We must ol^ect to his exami-
nation.

Mr. Attorney General, — ^He certainly is an
accomplice, but he is still a good witness. I
must again refer to Layer's trial. In that
case. Lynch and Piunkett, both accomplices,
were examined as witnesses for the crowq.
Every day's experience shows that accom-
pFices may be heard. The objection can only

go to the credit of the present witness, not to .
is competency.

Chief Juitice, — ^There can be no doubt
on this poi^t. Where previous testimony has
been given, the evidence of an accomplice can
certunly be received.

Mr. Attorney General, — ^You are I believe
a subject of the United States ? — Witnesi.^T
am a subject of the United States.

Do vou recollect having seen the prisoner
.bst fall, and where?— The prisoner came to
Swanton in Vermont about the middle of
November last, and put up at a tavern near
my house : he desired me to take a walk with
him, which I did ; he told me he had a
matter which he wished to communicate, if I
would not reveal it : it would be of advantage
tom9.

What did be afterwards tell you ?— He in-
Ibrmed me that he had been in -Canada, in
order to sound the minds of the Canadians,
and to learn whether they were willing to rise
and take the gpvei;nment out of the hands of
the Britii^; that he had been in Canada
befbre in the conrsp of last Summer, and had
been ii| Philadelphia on thp same business. <

Pid he leQ you by whcfm he was employed?

Did he tell you where he had been?-r-Yes{
he said he had been in Montreal, and found
that the people were disposed to lend a hand
in a revolution and were willine to seize the
govc^ment of the country, if tney had any
body to lead them ; and that he was then ce-
turning to Mr. Adet with this information.

Relate any other particulars of the conver*
sation which you remember P- I asked him
if he had found any men that could be de-
pended on, who were willing to join him : he
answered yes, one Black or Blake, and that
there was a number of others whom he had
seen and conversed with ; he particularly
mentioned one Barnard (whom I did not
know), who he supposed ^ould be willing to
join him ; he told me that he was then going
to Philadelphia, to Mr. Adet, to make his re-
turns of what he had done in the province.
I asked him if he had anv letters to Mr.
Adet ; 1^ aaxd he had one, wnich I understood
to be from Mr. Black or Blake, but I did not
see it.

Were you ever present at any examination
of papers ? — No, sir, I was never present at
any examination of papers.

Had you any further conversation at tbh
time P — We had some conversation with re*
gard to the taking of Quebec: the prisoner
seemed to think, if that could be done, the
country might soon be overcome, and he pro-
posed bringing in a numbc»r of men from the •
states, on rafts.

Did the prisoner say he meant to return to
Canada ?^He told me that he expected.to be
back again some time in April or the be-
ginning of May following.

The prisoner I believe solicited you to j,oin
him?— Yes, he did.

Did you undertake to assist himP — ^I did
certainly engage to asdst him in the under-
taking.

When did you next see the prisoner? —
About the 30th of April last; he returned to
Swanton and came to the tavern close to my
house.

Had you any discourse at this time?^Yes,
sir.

Relate it P-— He save roe a wink to step
aside, and asked if I had ^en in Canada
during the winter x I answered I had not : he
asked me what news from there, whether I
had heard of any discoveries respecting him;
I told him I had not; he s»d he had heard
on the road that he had been cfiscovered t I
told him I knew nothing about it.

Did he converse with any other person .'—
Yes, with Mr. Holeite for about half an hour
out of door& and tne next morning he asked
me to assist tiim with a boat, and two hands
to go to the Isle La Motte^ and I procuicd the
hands for him.

Were you sent in aearch of ai» person by
the prisoner ?— About the <6th of April, the
prisoner desired me to go tp St. Joh&> in

773]

J6r High IWoioii.

k. D. 1797.

|774

Can^a, to brio^ out Fiicbelto to bim. I
•sked him if Fnchette would come : be aiw
ftweicd yesy he knows me. I accordingly went
to St John's, and did my errand to Frichette,
and brought bim to Swaoton. The orisoner
and Fricbette went out together ana had a
conversation : after which he told lAe he had
determined to go into Canada with Fricbette.

Did the prisoner eive you any money for
vour journ^ to St. John*s P — Yes, a few dol-
urs.

What did he tell you concernine that
money P — He told me that the money he had
given me was not for pay, but for my ex-
penses ; that my pav woidd begin from the
time be first engaged[ with me, by which 1
understood he meant November last

Whan he leA you, did he say to what place
be meant to gof — He told me that he and
Fridbette were going to Quebec to view the
place.

For whaA purpose? — He saiid he meant to
lay some plan to take the garrison ; but what
plan be could not say till Iub liad seen it.

DU you make anv inquiiy respectmg the
prisoner's papers?— Yes, sir; I asked him
where thev were, he said he had left them
with bb brother, who was then at Mr. Sco-
vill's; be told me also that Scovill had roar-
iied a sister of his^ and had moved to Swan ton
in February last, m order to afford a home for
bim and his friends.

Tkomoi Buiterfield cross-examined by Mr.

Frahcklin,

How long have you known the prisoner ?^ —
The first time I saw bim was a twelve month
ago last April*

Is the prisoner a subject of the United
States ?— I do not know, but I understood him
to be so : be told me be was bom in Boston.

Were not you apprehended in May last on
suspicion of treason ?— I was taken up at St.
John's in May last, for uding and assisting
Ibis Mr. Maciane, and I am now in custody.

Chief JuMtice, — ^You said that your pav was
to commence from the time you eneaged, had
you any specific sum promised you r

VFtfaetf.— N0| sii ; 1 had no specific sum
promised me.

CAarfei Frkhettt swom-'Examined by Mr.
Attorney General,

[The witness observed that be was unable
to express himself in the English lan-

fuage, whereupon he was allowed to give
is evidence in French, and Mr. James
Tanswell was sworn as interpreter.]

When did you first become ac(|uainted with
the prisoner ?— I first saw the prisoner in the
month of June, 1796.

By what name did you then know bim f-^
He then went by the name of David Blac*
lane.

Where did you first see bim P— He came to
my bouse at Saint John's^ and adced me if I

knew one Fricbette ; to whicb I answered,
'< I am the person." He aaked me if I had
horses to sell ; I answered. ^ Yes." We went
into the field, and he asked me if I could keep
a secret and was an honest man ; I told him
not to trust me too much. He said he had a
secret to tell me ; but that he could not com-
municate it without my taking an oath of
secrecy.

Did you take the oath ?— Yes, I took the
oath.

What conversation passed afterwards ? — ^He
asked me if I would go to Philadelphia or to
France, I asked him for what purpose; he
answered, ** to see the French minister." I
said no, it was too far ; he said if I would so
with him, he would give me a good reward ;
I replied it was impossible. He then asked
me if I could procure a certificate from five or
six Canadians, to show that there were more
people who wished for a change of govern-
ment than were contented with the present
government; I said it was impossible : he re-

eied, the certificate could do no barm. He
ide me not be afraid, that be was an officer in
the French army; he asked repeatedly for
the certificate, but I did not procure it

When did you next see the prisoner?—
About the latter end of April last Butterfield
came for me, and conductea me to him. He
was then near the Falls of Missiskoui river*
he gave me a good reception ; we took a walk
together.

What passed between you at this time?— >
He asked me whether there was any news in
Canada; I told him, <' No;** he asked me if I
had revealed what had passed between us last
Autumn; I told biro I had not He then
asked me if I thought he might safely go
thither; I said, ^ Yes;" he proposed that we
should go together; I askcxl to what part;
he answered he did not exactly know, but
perhaps he might go to Quebec. He asked
me if I would conduct him; to which I
agreed.

You <iame in, did you not?— Yes, we passed
behind the fort of Saint John's before day-
light, and proceeded on the South Shore road
to Saint Nicholas. On the journey the pri-
soner observed, the country wantdi Fngfish
fanners for its improvement.

What passed at St. Nicholas?— At Saint
Nicholas he asked me why the prisoners,
then in gaol at Quebec, were confined ; and if
I thought the Canadkns were disposed to re-
volt ; I said no, they were not very warlike,
nor desirous of a war ; but he did not tell m«
that he came to make a revolt, he lauehed
when he spoke about a revolt. He asked me
if I knew one Black, a member of the pro-
vincial parliament ; I said *« No." He after-
wards told me that be was come to take
Quebee; I said ** if I thought 'so, I would go
back." He said he did not intend to hurt anv
body : that if he had five hundred men with

{>ikes of wood six or seven feet long, hardened *
n the fir«, he could take tbetoi^n. He d^

775]

$7 GEOKGE m.

Triai ofDwM Mattane

[776

sired m^ to ask my brother rcfpeetine the 1 that the most, pf them had eafistedi merelj tn

people at Quebec, why they were Id gaoL I
did' 80y he told me ror making disturbances
about the road act.

Proceed wifh your story?— -We left St
Nicholas, and crossed the river St. Lawrence
above Wolfe's Cove, where we landed. The
prisoner sent me to town to bring Mr. Black
to him, which' 1 accordingly did. When Mr.
Black arrived, the prisoner desired him to ex-
cuse the liberty he had taken in sending; for
kirn, and said be was afraid of coming mto
town himeelfy for fear of beinesuspected.

At what time was thb?— This was about
two o'clock in the afternoon.

Now go on P-^Mr. Black then told the pri-
soner, that I had informed him of the inten*
tion of his journey ; Mr. Black said he did not
think it could succeed, that he had attempted
the same business without success, ana he
therefore advised the prisoner to go o£f with-
out making the attempt ; he said the t^ana-
dians were not sufiicienUy disposed to rise ;
and were little to be depended on, that one
went one way, and another another way, and
that they were not worth doine any thing for.
The prisoner said that he shoiud so away.

Continue your narrative ?—Ue informed
Mr. Black he had a letter for him,, and said
he had another letter for another person. Mr,
Black opened and read both letters, and then
advised the prisoner to tear them to pieces;
Mr. Black tore one and the prisoner the other.
I advised them to bury the letters, which was
done. The prisoner then told Black that he
would go away as soon as the tide served, and
begged him to keep the secret; for, that, if he
revealed it, he would do him a great injury.
He said that Mr. Marston, one of the coup
stables at Montreal had been offered five hun-
dred dollars to take him the vear before; Mr.
Black told him he was an nonest man, and
that he need not be afraid.

Was any thing said about taking Quebec ?->-
Yea, there was.

What was itP— Mr. Black asked the pri-
soner what plan he had for taking the town :
the prisoner answered that it was very easy to
take it; that if he had five hundred men, he
would take it very easily : that each man
might be armed with a pike about six or seven
feet long, pointed with iron and hardened in
the fire; and if the town-gates were open, one
company might come in at one gato and
another at another gate, and strike at the
same time. The troops, be said, would be so
surprised, that they would not know which
-way to turn ; he thought there would not be a
person killed on either side. I heard no more.
' What was the reason ? — I fell asleep.

-Did you hear any thing afterwards ? — When
I awoke I heard the prisoner aay to Mr.
Black that something might be given to the
troops to set them Asleep. Mr. Black said
that would do very well, that the greater part
of the troops were volunteers and desired no-

thmg better than to by down thesir vms

get bread.

Was any thins said about coming to Que-
bec ?— «Mr. Black desired the prisoner not to
be ashamed nor afraid, but to come to his
house, dress himself like a gentleman and
take a walk about the town.

Did the prisoner accept this invitation ? —
He expressed a dislike to come into town ;
but Mr. Black told him not to beafiraid, and
he at length consented to come. Mr. Black
did^not approve of his coming in company
with him, because he said, he himselr was
walched, and their being together might cre->
ate suspicion ; and he desired me to. bring
him to his house in the evening, which I ac-
cordingly did.

You have said that you first knew the
prisoner by the name of Maclane. By
what name did you call him on the journey
from Saint John's to Quebec? — ^The prisoner
desired me to call him Fc^lt and I c^ed him
by that name from Saint John's till we went
to Mr. Black's.

John Black, esq.. sworn. — Examined by Mr.
Attorney General,

Pray, sir, do ^ou recollect having seen the
last wi mess (Frichette) on or about the tenth
of May last, and where ? — Charles Frichette
called on me on the tenth of May last, about
twelve or one o'clock at my own house in
Quebec.

Did he offer any thing for sale ? — At first
he asked me if I would buy some oak timber of
him, and we accordingly bargaiued for oak
timber; but af\erwar£ he deured to speak
with me in private : I went with him into
another room, where he took me by the hand
and said " you will be surprised when I tell
you that I have no oak timber to sell. I am
come upon business of a quite different na-
ture;'' then squeezing me by the hand he
said, are you the Mr. Black that was in gaol
in the year 1794 : I told him I was : ^ you
liave been much injured," said he, " but your
injuries are now almost at an end, the French
and Americans have taken up your cause, and
you will soon triumph over all your enemies."
1 wished to know why he came to roe ; I told
him I had already been caught bv insidious
men : then squeezmg both my hands he asked
« zxt you reaUy to be depended upon V* I told
him I was to be depended on : <* then," says
he '' there is a French general within a quar-
ter of a league'from this place who wishes to
have a conversation with you respecting the
taking of the garrison of Quebec.'' I asked
by what means ? Has he an army ? He an-
swered '' No, he has no army, he wishes to
'concert measures with you, and ^ou must
come immediately with meto^ee mm.*'

Did }rou comply with his re(|Mest?-^I
thought it was prudent to comply with it, and
I proposed to go in a calash ; but Frichette did
not approve of it; I therefore s«t off in pom^*
pany withhim on fiio^

7771

^t High Tnaton,

A. D. 17»7.

[778

To wha4 place did he conduct you ?— We | mod at the lines ready at a nod, with part of
crossed the plains of Abraham, wentdbwn by I which I mean to garrison this place and with
xx7»i«u».«^»« »n^..» -iLf*itr<>kon^*.i«;n ivk«» i[^q remainder perhaps form an expedition

against Halifax. You may think me young,
said he, for such an enterprise ; but this is the
system France pursues at present; she will
not employ an old general. Previous to my
seeing the prisoner, and until the latter part of
our conversation, I understood his name ta
be Felt ; but he .then gave me two letters,
the one directed to John Blackwood, esq. and
the other directed to myself, recommending;
the prisoner as a gentleman highly worthy or
notice, by the name of Colonel David iiac
Lane.

What did you do with these letters after he
delivered them to you ? — After reading the
letters I tore them and buried them; but
afler the prisoner was arrested I took thenr
up again, and have them now in my pocket,

[Here the witness delivered the two letters to

the clerk.]

The prisoner told you Mr. Adet was gone
to Europe? did he say for what purpose P— He
told me that Mr. Adet was gone to Europe,
for the purpose of bringing a force toco-operate
with the fifteen thousand men that were to be
broujght in from the states.

Did he make any inquiries respecting Que-
bec ? — He inquired much concerning the pro-
perty, public and private, lliat there was in
Quebec. I told him I thought there might
be from three to fhe hundred thousand pounds
I knew pot how much more. He said ttie pro^
perly was intended to be given those who
should take the city : he also told roe that he
bad been in the province in October last;
that the government boasted of having quelled
the tumults at Montreal: but that it was in
reality he that had done it.

Did you recommend to him to come into
the garrison.' — Yes, I advised him to
come to town after dark ; he expressed , his
fears of being discovered, and said that govern-
ment had ottered five hundred dollars for his
person. He however at length consented, and
gave me his pocket book (in which his name
was written) to prevent detection in case he
was taken.

WolCe'scove, and up Mr.Mabane'shill. When
we came to the side of the wood, Frichette
asked me to so into the wood with him, which
I at first ^clined, not knowing how many
people might be there. Frichette went in ;
lie came out again shortly after, and I saw
him beckon to me ; I then went about two
hundred yards into the woods, where I found
Ihe prisoner in a very long beard.

Had you any conversation with him ? — He
shook hands with me, and expressed himself
glad to see me, begged pardon for sending for
me, but added that he wished to see me on a
matter of great importance. I think it proper
to mention here, that I never saw the pri-
soner, till I then saw him in the wood ; nor
had I ever heard of or knew there was such a
man in existence. I think it also necessary
to add that I was uncertain in regard to
my situation when thus in the wood, and
that I therefore agreed to every measure the
prisoner proposed.

I wish you to relate to the Court and jury
the particulars of the conversation Which pas-
sed between you? — ^The prisoner said, his
man had told him that he had explained to
me a part of his plan, ** my plan,'* said the
prisoner, ** is that of humanity. I am sorry to
see a great people labouring under the ty-
ranny of England : I propose to push the Bri-
tish government from the continent of Ame-
rica." I asked him by what means : he an-
swered, with eight or ten men of influence, such
as I might be, one might raise, under plausible
pretences, as many people as possible : wheat
a certain appointed time would be joined by a
number of men, who were following him in
irom the states under various pretexts of seek-
iag labour, &c. ; that he would arm them
with pikes of eight feet in length, headed with
iron, and hardened in the fire, which he con-
sidered to be eighteen inches longer than the
British musket and bayonet; that laudanum,
be thought, might be given to the troops with
effect ; Uiat the attack must be sudden, they
would rush in, but not take a life if possibleto
avoid it; he hoped none would be taken; but
at the same time, said he, for the sake of
posterity all who resist most fall.

What farther ?^He observed to me that we
must take care not to injure the works; for
that would render us vulnerable after we were
masters of the garrison. He said, he led Mr.
Adef on the seventh of April, who was going
to France on the tenth, that both he and the
Spanish minister were concerned in the mea-
sure; he added these words ''Adet is the
man of business, the Spaniard is a fop."

Did he observe any thing farther to you ? —
He said, that measures were so concerted with
Mr. Adetp that if we could but possess our-
selves of^ the garrison by surprise, it could
never be Recovered from us ; for, said he, be-
sides the measures taken by the French and
d|>aniah jniiusters, I have fifteen tbouauid

[Here the witness produced the pocket
book.]

Did the prisoner come into town with vou ?
— No, I lefx him to be conducted by Fricnette
to my. house when nieht came on. As isoon
as I came into town I gave information to a
magistrate (Mr. Young), and the prisoner was
apprehended the same evening, about eleven
oxlock at my house.

John Black, esq.— cross-examined by Mr.

Fyke.

By whom were the letters signed ? — By Mr.
Hunsdtn.

Is Hunsden a friend to the British govern-
ueiit ?— I cannot tell, but I believe so ; I conr

779]

87 GEORGB IIL

Trial ^Damd Madani

[780

aider him to be a good man, and a friead to
good order.

What were the letters about ? — ^Tliey were
about business, timber, staves, and lumber in
general.

Did not the prisoner tell you that he came
into the province to purchase horses P — No,
he told me that the reduction of the fortress
of Quebec was the object of his journey ; that
he had bought a horse Yamaska, but that this
ivas for a mask.

Hemian WUsius Ryland, esq. secretary to his
excellency the governor general, sworn—
Examined by Mr. Attorney General,

I must trouble yau, Sir, to relate the cir-
cumstances relative to the prisoner's name,
which took place when he was apprehended?
^•Between eleven and twelve o'clock at ni^ht,
on the tenth of Ma^, I recdved a deposition
made by the last witness, containing m sub-
stance the evidence which be has just given;
from which I learnt that Maclane was in
Quebec. I eommunkated it immediately to the
governor, and, hy his order, went with a small
party of soldiers to apprehend him; I found
him in bed i^ Mr. Black's house in the
suburbs. I awoke him, and asked him what
his name was; he said it was Felt: I told
him I understood it was Maclane; he again
asserted that his name was Felt, and that I
was mistaken. It was too late to carry him
before a magistrate: he was conducted imme-
diately to the mainguard. f there enquired
what monies he had with him : a bag was

Sroduced, containing one hundred and forty
ollars, the greater part in quarter dollars : I
wished to give htm a receipt for it ; and asked
him in what name I should give the receipt :
he answered, Jacob Felt ; I gave him a re-
ceipt for monies found on Jacob Felt, alias
David Maclane.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— I ha^e no farther
questions.

Herman Wittiut Ryland^ esq. cross-examined

by Mr. Pyke,

What was his conduct when apprehended ?
-*Parfectl]|r decent and collectea, not like a
man conscious of any crime.

Mr. Attorney General. — We have several
other witnesses who are now present in court;
but as the case is already fully established,
v^ shall rest it upon the testimony which the
jury have alreaay heard. The evidence on
the nart of the crown is closed.

Mr. Pyke. — ^The prisoner desires to be heard
pereenaUy in his defence, and hopes the Court
will allow both him and his counsel to speak.
He wishes to speak first.

Chief Jutticc^The Court will most readily
allow the prisoner, in his present unfortunate
situation, every thine which he can reasonably
ask. It is not usual for the prisoner to speak
before his counsel; but we will hear both him
and you in th« order yOu may think proper
to adopt.

The PaxsoBEa's Defehcs.

May it please your Honours; I feel much
satisfied, that I am permitted to speak before
you on this solemn occasion. I am indeed
very sensible that a black cloud han^ over
my head; that every thing looks *very dark
against me; but I think and trust, if my
conduct be looked into, it will be dispelled
into gentle showers. I feel gratitude that I
have oeen indulged in every thtoe reasonable.
I thank the Court for its indu^nce to me.
Gentlemen of the jury, the day is at last
arrived which we have looked for, on which
you are to decide my fate. Your faces are
all strange to me ; but if I can read in your
faces your hearts, surely I have notliing to
fear.— To you Mr. Shenff and to you Gaoler,
in whose custody I have been since the tenth
dav of May last, I make my public acknow-
ledgments, and thank you for the kind treat-
ment I have received. To you — [Here the
prisoner turned towards the audience and
seemed prepared to address them.]

Chitf Joitice.— Prisoner ; The Court will
be happy to hear every thine you can sav in
your defence, but it must be addressed to
them.

PrifOfier.— I beg pardon if I have done
wrong, I will continue my defence^ — I am
confident I can explain what now appears
against me, but in accounting to you for my
conduct in this province, it is necessary that £
should give you a little narrative of my life,
previous to my coming here ; for it is in some
measure boutid up with the views I had in
this country; and I shall sometimes be
oblieed to go back a little from one tiling to
another; but I hope I shall not tire your pa-
tience, nor do what is improper. I am not a
man used to address in this way; if I should
go astray, the Court will put me to rights.—
It is true, to say, my life has been a day of
sorrow. I was unfortunate in trade, which is
what broueht me first to this country : I had
a Store at Providence, in Rhode island, where
I lived in credit for some years: I had a
brother-in-law named Jacob Felt We failed
in trade : we had losses ; we were unsuccessful.
I found.we must positively fail, and I commu-
nicated this to my brother. He stud, many
people had been at the Store, who haid been
m Canada, who said much money might be
made there : this was in the (all ninety-five.
When I found my presses come so hard
against me, that it was certwn I could not
stand against them, I advised my brother to
take goods from the Store, and go to Canada
with them to see what could be done there,
hoping, if they turned to account, to be able
to satisfy some of m v creditors. After he was
gone, I was involved worse an4worse: I pre- '
pared myself to eo somewhere, seeing that
my creditors would come upon me.

X had desired my brother to meet me on
Greirafi^ near the lines, I went there and
foundiig^ bmher had left some goods theie. •

tSI]

Jot High Treason*

t, toon after Ihit, came into Canada to 8t.
John's. Before this, I had been about Lake
Cbamplain, loitering away the time till I was
to foeel my brother. I was two or three days
with Squire Butterfield, and talked with him
about canals and roads, and such like. I went
* from- St. John's to Montreal, and put up at
•Mr. Cushing's, where I met with one Mr.
Moore, who was come upon a speculation
of buying lands or cutting canals: we had
some conversation together, and he de-
sired me not to interfere with him in his
speculations. Finding there was nothing to
be done in this ^ay, I returned to Greigg*s,
where I saw Mr. Barnard: I asked him a
number of questions of a mercantile nature,
about the province, because I meant to come
and settle m it, and endeavour to get a living
in it. I asked about the situation of the Ca-
nadians ; because, if there was likely to be
disturbances, it might not be prudent to think
of settling here, and I must turn my views to
something else.

After Iwas in Canada the first time, I saw
several Americans: they asked me if I had
been about the province, and if I had been
upon the mountain of Montreal, I said no :
tbev advised me, if I returned, to visit it, as
wed worthy of curiosity. When I returned
to Montreal to look after some work;; for, I
vroidd willingly have worked, though I was
never much used to it; having nothmg to do,
I thought it would be a good time to visit the
mountain ; I did so, and when I came back, I
told Mr. Cushing where I had been : be sud
you should not mention that: I asked, why
so ; he said, because you are much suspected
here : I asked why I was suspected, I could
give good proof of who I was. I went to my
saddle bags, and took out from it my pocket
book to get for that purpose, the paper which
he has mentioned. In crossing the Lake, my
pocket-book had fallen into the ^ater, and
got damaged on one side : 1 put it into my
saddle bags, where there was an old pair of
shoes worn out at the toes, the paper had
sUpped between the soles.

I must now go back a little, in my narrative
to show you how I came by this paper. My
wife was related to a famUy of tne name of
Belshiroy at Newport, in Rhode island. There
was a brother and two sisters, their father
was concerned in the Guinea trade, and was
killed by the negroes on the coast of Africa ;
the brother followed the sea ; he died three
or four years a^, and left some property in
France, which his sisters could never get by
reason of the troubles. As I found it was not
likely I could do any better, I thought to go
to France, to tr^ to get this property, and
bring out goods tor it, which would yield me
B commission :*for this purpose I went to the
French minister at Philadeipbia, to get a cer-
tificate; he was not there, but I saw bis clerk,
whose name I do not well remember; he
gave me a paper certifyme, that the French
minister interested himself in my family con-

A.^ D. 1797.

cerns. I did not then go to France, but cfame
to Canada. Here finding there had been some
disturbances, and that I was suspected, I de-
termined to go back to New York, and from
tiience to France. When I came to New
York^ I found that the French, as' the English
had done before, took all our vessels they
could lay hold of, not only those bound to an
enemy*s port, but also those bound to their
own ports. Now again I was once more dis-
appointed, and knew not which way to turn.
I looked again towards Canada; for I was
fearful of my creditors in the States, and
hoped something yet would turn up. When
I returned again to the Lake, I had found
that I could^buy timber on credit, and I meant
to bring some here to change for horses to
take out of the province, which I thought
would turn to a double advantage. I met
Squire Butterfield, and asked him if he knew
any body that would take me into Canada ;
he answered yes, he knew one Frichette. I
said I knew him, and he went to fetch
Frichette to me. I knew my creditors fol*
lowed me ; and that it would be very easy for
them to find me out, and therefore, as I did
not wish to be taken, I resolved to go by
another name ; for this reason, I told Fricnelte
that ray name was Jacob Felt, and he accord-
ingly called me always by that name.* I made
an agreement with Frichette to carry me
down to Quebec, or perhaps a little below ;.
and to show me the places where I could pur-
chase the best horses, which he promised me
to do. We set out in the night with a feny^
man of South River, and he landed us between
Watson's point and the fort of Saint John's, a
little before day- break. We were landed
about a quarter of a mile from the Fort. I
did no\ know that it was necessary that I
should ^ve in my name at any place, and I
shunned S%^ John's, that my creditors might
not have a cine to find me. I ^as so appre-
hensive oT them, that I asked Mr. Black,
when I came there, if there was any body
from the States that knew me. When we
came to Mr. Frichette's, jve staid a day in bia
house, and then he and I set out for Quebec.
The first day we breakfasted with a brother
of Mr. Frichette, a priest at Bellisle. We
then came to Sorel ; I saw no horses that 1
liked, till I came to Saint Fran9ois, where I
bought one. We continued our journey after
this, till we came to Saint Nicholas, where
three of Mr. Frichette's brothers live. Whei^
we came there, he wanted to stop a little
time. He said some Canadians had been put
in prison: I asked on what account: he said
on account of the Road bill. I asked if he
did not think they would rise again, and en-
deavour to rescue their companions out of
prison: he said he believed not, they were not
vei^ warlike ; but he did not know ; and he
talked to me about arming them with pikes
in case any thing should happen. I came
over to Wolfe's Cove, and sent Frichette to
Bring Mr. Black ; for I was prevented from

783] S7 GEORGE III.

coining into Quebec, by fear of my creditors,
or of soiqe persons knowing me, who might
give information where I was. I remained in
the place where I was put on shoifie^, till Mr.
Frichette came, back, and brought Mr. Black
with him. I had some conversation with Mr.
Black: he said he should like to purchase
some timber, but did not choose to buy before
he had seen it. I had asked one captain
Hunsden in Vermont to give me letters to
Canada, to some body that could give me any
business to do : he gave me letters to Mr.
Blackwood, and Mr. Black, staling, that I
had timber to di8||ose of, and mentioning me
by my name '^ David Maclane.^ Mr. Black
knew Mr. Hunsden, and when I gave him
the letter, be asked me to come to his house
at Quebec. I said I was afraid of my credi-
tors, and asked him if there were any stran-
fers in Quebec, lately arrived from the States,
[e said no, and pressed me very hard to come,
but recommenaed me to keep the name of
Jacob Felt, which I had taken ; and as the
letters to Mr. Blackwood and himself, be
said, mentioned my real name, he advised me
to tear them to pieces, which we did. I con-
sented afterwaras to come to his house; but
as my creditors were strangers td Mr. Black,
and might be in Quebec without his know-
ledge, I determined not to go in, till after
dark. Mr. Black staid a little longer with me,
and we conversed upon indifferent subjects,
nmong the rest about Quebec, the strength of
the place, and whether it could be taken or
not. He left me shortljr afler. I got to his
house about half after eight, and was taken
into custody about eleven o'clock the same
night.

Grentlemen of the Jury, I think I have
made every thing very clear ; no doubts can
remain in your mmds ; my story is a very plaui
one, and you must see, from the narrative
which I have given, that I am an innocent
man. The witnesses who have appeared
aeainst me. may all be honest men, for aught
I Know ; I have nothine in particular to obiect
against them. But all are liable to mistake ;
and it is now evidefat how much they have
been mistaken. They have grossly mistaken
my views, which were only views of txade,
and not at all political. I rely upon your in-
tegrity and humanity, but I put my trust in a
much greater power. I put trust in you. oh
God ! Do thou pour into the hearts of judges
wisdom and knowledge ; strengthen their in-
clination to do justice, and impress on the
minds of them, and on the minds of this jury,
who arc now to decide upon mv cause, the
innocence of thy servant; ancl, oh God!
touch the lips of these, thy young servants,
who are to speak in my behalf: give them
eloquence and persuasive arguments: graat
that their endeavours may be successful, and
that I may live to serve and glorify thee
herea/ter.

Mr. PyXM;.— Gentlemen of the Jury ; The
ard«ou8 and important task of conducting

Trial ff David Madane

[784

the prisoner's defence has been assigned bj
the Court to my learned friend Mr. Franck-
lin and myself. Important this cause must
be acknowledged in every point of view ; but
particularly as it regards the prisoner : to him
theconsequences will be serious indeed,should
you by your verdict find him euilty of the
crime of which he now stands charged ; and
arduous I must declare my task to he, when I
consider my own want of experience; I could
therefore wish the prisoner's counsel pos«
sessed of more abilities than I can presume to.
Nevertheless, I confess, I feel a degree of
confidence when I reflect tha^t I am before an
English tribunal, which is at all times ready
to extend its indulgence to those unfortunate
persons, who are brought before it, accused of
capital crimes ; and tliat the Court has been,
and still is, considered, in some measure, b^
the laws of England, as counsel for the pn-
soner. tDn those accounts, I do not doubt
but that I shall receive the ceuntenance and
assistance of the Bench, as well as your in-
dulgence (gentlemen of the jury) in mv en-
deavour to discharge the duty assigned me.
And here I beg leave to express my satisfac-
tion to find that the prisoner's fate is in the
hands of men of your respectability and cha«
racter, as it insures to him a just verdict,
knowiag and well persuaded, as I am, that
you are incapable of being governed by those
prejudices which influence only weak and
unenlightened minds, and that those false re*
ports, which have been circulated against the
prisoner, tending to render odious the cha-
racter of a man urcadv too unfbrtunate, will
not with you have the smallest weight I
am well persuaded also that, however ap«
pearances ma^ be against the prisoner, never*
theless^ou will require positive and indisput-
able evidence of the charges brought against
him; that evidence which the law, in cases
of high treason, requires, amounting to the
clearest demonstration, and not mere words,
and vague conversations, so liable to be mis-
interpreted by those who hear them ; for, gen-
tlemen, when the smallest doubt can be etv-
tertained in your minds of the guilt of the
prisoner, it is your bounden duty to lean to
the side of mercy and acquit him ; Were the

{)risoner before one of those bloody tribnnals
ately erected in that republic which has 'so
long disturbed the peace of Europe, he and
his counsel would have strong srounds of ap«
prehension ; but here they can have none, as
they know and are satisfied that he stands
before a pure and uncorrupt tribunal, an Eng-
lish tribunal, where justice is mipgled with
mercy, and where accusation and suspicibn
alone are not sufficient grounds fot convic-
tion.

Gentlemen, the prisoner at the bar, as has
been stated to you on the part of the prose-
aition, stands charged in the indictment with
two distinct species of treason ; the first, for
compassing and intending to depose the kinc^
and put him to death ; and tha second for aek

785]

Jot High Treaton.

A. D. 1797.

C786

herine to, aiding, and comforting the king's
enemies, contraiy to his allegiance. The able
manner, in which my learned friend, the
attomey-ceneral, has explained to vou, gen-
tlemen, tbe nature of the crime of nigh trea-
son, and its different species, makes it un-
necessary for me to expatiate thereon; but, I
must beg leave to differ from mv learned
friend in his application of it to the present
rase. Let us therefore examine, how far the
crime, of which the prisoner stands charged,
has been proved against him. Now, in order
to support the first charge in the indictment,
it was necessary, on the part of the prose-
cution, to prove the intention of which the
prisoner is there accused, viz. the compassing
and imagining the king's death. Has this
been done? — I contend it has not, nor is
there a shadow of proof of any intention on
the part of the prisoner to depose and take
away the life of our beloved sovereign ; indeed
it is absurd to suppose that he had any such
idea, and it is equally absurd to suppose the
act of any individual in this distant part of
his majesty's dominions, could in the smallest
degree affect the sacred person of his majesty;
nor indeed could it possibly have that ten-
dency, should it even extend so far as to effect
the separation of Canada from the dominion
of the crown of Great Britain. Therefore,
gentlemen, no such intention, as that stated
in tbe first charge of the indictment, being
firoved against the prisoner, you must be oi
opinion, that this charge stands unsupported :
I will therefore urge no more on this head,
but will now consider how far the evidence

foes to support the second charge in the in-
ictment, namely, <' that the prisoner was ad-
tiering to, aiding, and comforting the king's
enemies.^' Now, to support this charge.
It was necessary on the pSart of the prosecu-
tion to prove, that the prisoner had actually
given aid and information to our enemies:
ut of this no proof appears; in lieu thereof,
an endeavour has been made to prove an in-
tention, on the part of the prisoner to do so ;
but the law requires more, for the intention
ofgiving aid is not sufficient to support this
charge against the prisoner, and m this it
differs ver}r materially from the first charge.
The intention must be carried into effect, at
least so far as it regards the person accused,
and on this account, although the informa-
tion sent never was actually received, as in the
case of intercepted letters, the crime however
Is considered as complete on the part of him
who wrote and sent them ; but this has not
even been proved against the prisoner : in-
deed no other evidence has been offered to
you but of certain conversations, which took
place at different times, between the prisoner
and the witnesses.. The whole of which, as
to any design of overthrowing the govern-
ment of this province, or ofaimngthe king's
Enemies, appears to me to be altogether im-
probable: mdeed we find from one part of
frichette's testimony, that he did not believe
VOL, XXVL

the prisoner had any such desi|;n ; for, on
their journey down to Quebec, Fnchctte says,
he put the Question to him, when the pri-*
soner, smiled and answered, that he intended
no harm to the country. The prisoner, as he
has informed you, and which has been proved
by several of the witnesses, is an alien, a na-
tive and subject of the United States of^ Ame-
rica, where he has hitherto always resided,
and for a long time was engaged in trade; but
being unfortunate in his business, he became
a bankrupt, and was in consequence much
harassed and persecuted by his creditors,
who threatened him with imprisonment, ana
at length, to avoid this, he was obliged to quit
his house and family to seek an asylum in
this country. His creditors even pursued him
from the States here : of this he received in-
formation, and on that account found it ne-
cessary to take upon himself the feigned
name of Jacob Felt, in order to elude their
pursuit Having arrived in this country, his
first object was, to settle himself in some kind
of business, and, previous thereto, it was very
natural and necessary for him to make some
enauiries into the state of the province, as
well as to inform himself of the general dis-
position of its inhabitants. And what were
those enquiries? was there not a time when
every citizen of Quebec made the same ? Alt
ranks and descriptions of people here endea-
voured to obtain information of the disposi-
tion and sentiments of the Canadians in the
distant parishes. Thank God, those enquiries
are no longer necessary; however I humbly
conceive that they were not more criminal in
Mr. Maclane than in any other person. It
must be acknowledged that the conductor
the prisoner has been in some measure im-
prudent, but it surely has not been such as
to justify you, gentlemen, in convicting him
of the cnme of which he is now accused ;
you must therefore acquit the prisoner on this
charge also : and now 1 trust and hope, that
whatever may have turned up favourable
to the prisoner in the course of this trial,
and may be passed over unobserved by his
counsel, will be supplied by the superior
discernment of the Court, I therefore, gentle-
men, leave the prisoner in your hands, not
doubting but that you will do him justice,
and hy your verdict, at once acquit the several
duties which you owe to the laws of the coun-
try, the prisoner, and yourselves.

Mr. JFrancklin. — May it please your Ho-
nours, and you Gentlemen of^thc Jury; I be-
lieve it is not necessary for me to make any
apology for appearing here in defence of the
unfortunate man at the bar ; as the Court has
assigned me that duty, which I shall endea-
vour to perform to the best of ray ability. —
Gentlemen, the prisoner has given you a nar«
rative of occurrences, previous to his cominjg
into this province; he has unfolded to you his
real designs, and I think his conduct must
now appear to you in a light, very different
from that in which the counsel for the prose-

3 £

787]

37 GEORGE III.

Trial qf David Madane

[788

cution have endeavoured to place it. It is to
be regretted, that proof cannot be offered to
you of many circum^ances which the pri-
soner has mentioned, because they are only
known to persons resident in another coun-
txy ; but, gentlemen, I trust, it is sufficiently
evident to you, that his views were entirely
of a private nature, and by no means hostile
to the government of this province. _ Every
tnan, engaged in mercantile pursuits, is liable
to misfortune ; this was the prisoner's lot; he
was a merchant in Rhode Island, but niet
with considerable losses, which obliged him
to quit that state, and seek for a country
where he might shelter himself from his cre-
ditors, who were very pressing, and endeavour
to repair his broken fortunes. This quarter
of the world seemed to offer a field tor his
exertions: new roads and canals were much
wanted for the advancement of agriculture
and commerce, and he flattered himself with
the prospect of exerting his talents usefully in
this line of business. He was, however, some-
what alarmed by various reports, which he
had heard of discontent and uneasiness among
the Canadians; it was thought in the Ame-
rican States that this country would shortly
be involved in political troubles, which he,
▼ery naturally, apprehended, might defeat
his plan and render his situation very pre-
carious. It became therefore a matter of im-
portance to obtain correct and certain infor- 1
mation on this head, and this will account for
the minuteness of his questions respecting
the state of the province and the disposition
of the inhabitants towards the government;
but, such being his motive, there was nothing
criminal in his enquiries, nor can he now be
charged with acquiring intelligence, with in-
tent to communicate it to the king's enemies.
It has been observed by my learned friend,
who is concerned with me in this defence,
that suspicion or doubtful proofs are not suffi-
cient to convict in cases of high treason. I
heartily concur with him, and m his opinion,
that neither the first nor the second count of
the indictment has been sufficiently substan-
tiated. In support of the first count, it ap-
pears to me necessary], to adduce evidence of
some direct plan or intention to take away
the king's life, as in the case of Crohagan,
who formed such a design at Lisbon, m a
foreign country; for the present is a con-
structive compassing, and it roust strike you
as monstrous to suppose, that the subversion
of the government of this province would en-
danger his majesty's natural life, when even
a revolution, which severed thirteen colonies
from the British empire did not in the least
affect his sacred person. In England the case
is different ; it is there usual to charge per-
sons, concerned in plots against the go*
vernment, with compassing the king'$ death,
and the reason assigned by Mr. Justice Fos-
ter is, that experience has shown that be-
tween the dethronement and the grave of
princes, the distance is very small. The same

reasoning will not appl^r here^ and ^ou must
therefore acquit the prisoner on this count.
As to the second count, which charges Uie

Krisoner with adhering to the king's enemies,
e has frankly acknowledged, Uiat he did
ask questions, but with views very different
from those attributed to him; and, I trust,
you are convinced of the truth of his asser-
tion. It is your duty to scrutinize most
strictly the evidence giveji against him, par-
ticularly as it partly comes from persons
chargeo as accomplices, who, with their own
mouths, proclaim their own bad character,
and who, beine implicated themselves, en-
deavour to shift the burthen of guilt from
their own heads, and ensure the conviction of
the person under trial, in order to save them-
selves from punishment.

Gentlemen, Barnard has not told you, that
the prisoner once mentioned the French re-
public, or the French minister at Philadel-
phia ; and I cannot help remarking a seeming
inconsistency in the evidence of this witness,
who, though he told the prisoner at their
second meeting, that he haa given informa-
tion to Mr. Maccord, a magistrate, of their
first conversation at La Prairie, was yet en-
trusted with more of his secrets. One would
suppose that this piece of inteUigence would
have alarmed the prisoner, and made him dis-
trust the witness ; out according to the latter's
account, it did not in the least.

Butterfield's testimony is much relied on,
but his manner of giving his evidence, the in-
difference and unconcern he showed in a case
which affects the life of a fellow creature,
could not fail to strike you, and shock the
sensibility of every feeling person who heard
him; he is entitled to little attention from
you, and you can give still less credit to so
prevaricating a witness as Frichette : in m^
humble opinion, you ought to disregard his
evidence entirely, a^ that of a person wholly
unworthy of belief. Gentlemen, as the crime
of high treason is of a heinous kind, so is the
punishment annexed to the commission of it
severe indeed. It behoves you then to con-
strue every thing most favourably for the pri-
soner, and not to condemn him, but upon the
fullest and most satisfactory proofs. He is a
subject of a neighbouring country, and a fair
opportunity now offers to exhibit to them an
instance of the liberality and impartiality of
our juries. The prisoner with gratitude ac-
knowledges the indulgence shown by the
Court, and is very sensible of the candour
with which the prosecution against him has
been conducted.

Gentlemen, it does not occur to me, that
any farther observations are necessary. I
will only remind you how scrupulously juries
in England have in modern times weighed
the proof in trials of the present nature, par-
ticularly in the late st^te prosecfXtions. I in-
trust the prisoner's fate to you with confidence:
gentlemen of your eminent integrity and dis-
cernment will aoubtless consider Eia case with-

980]

for High Trmuon.

A. D. 1797.

1790

out bia$ or prejudice^ and I feel assured that J
bjr acquitting him, you will satisfy your con-
sciences^ and discbarge your duty to the
country.

Reply.

Mr. Attonu^ General. — Gentlemen of the
Jury ; — ^Notwithstanding the lateness of the
hour, I roust yet request your attention for a
short time. It is m^ duty to reply to what
has fallen from the prisoner and nis counsel
in his defence, and to offer to your considera-
tion what that defence suggests to roe. I am
particularly bound not to neglect whatever
tends to prove the guilt of the accused.

Grenderiien, in the present instance no part
of the evidence on the part of the crown stands
controverted by the prisoner ; on the contrary,
he has admitted the different meetings with
Barnard, Gushing, Butterfield, Frichette, and
Black, and even the substance of the conver-
sations which passed between them. ^ Some
times he vindicates, at others he explains his
enquiries: he tells a story in itself unsatisfac-
tory, which, weak and trifling as it is, is at the
first blush evidently nothing; for, not a single
witness has' been called to support it. The
object of the defence is, to induce you to be-
lieve that his views in Canada were mercan-
tile, not traitorous; but in this he is not
consistent; one moment his visit to Canada
it to establish himself in trade, another merely
to avoid his creditors. If we admit the latter
to be' the object, why did he so often leave
Canada, when, so lon^^ as he remained in the
province, he was free from arrests? Must we
suppose that he lefl it to meet his creditors,
and insure a prison ? Again, admitting the
former to be tne object, what could have in-
duced him, when he made the inquiries which
the different witnesses have stated, to have
taken them apart, into b^e- walks and private
rooms f Would he have informed them that
he bad a secret of the utmost importance to
communicate ? That he put his life into their
hands } Or would he have exacted oaths of
secrecy ? Is it customary to require an oath
of secrecy when a merchant asks a question
upon trade ? Are commercial inquiries so dan-
gerous that, if known, the lives of the persons
venturing to make them are in daneer ? No,
gentlemen, this conduct speaks loudly; it de-
monstrates that he was conscious of the guilt
in which he was involved and well knew its
consequences. To proceed farther, is it a
mercantile transaction to tell Barnard, Cush-
klg, Chandonet, Buttcrfield, Frichette, and
Bbick, that his object was, to excite a revolu-
tion in Canada : to plan the introduction of
armaand ammunition clandestinely; to solicit
several tb engage in a projected invasion and
rebellion : to enlist others and to meditate
a|id consult on the means of delivering the
|m>viiice into the hands of the French re-
public: to enter it under an assumed name;
to plan the reduction of the strongest fortress
in the country by treachery ;— axe these the

characteristics of commercial concerns P Do
these inquiries resemble the inquiries of a
merchant } He says they were questions on
the state of trade, questions which a roan in
business would naturally ask, who had a de-
si;;n of settling in the province : can we be-
lieve it when we reflect on their general im-
port, or when we recollect questions to this
effect— are the people well afi^cted to the go-
vernment— will they join with me — witli the
French republic — and will they rise in rebel-
lion against their lawful sovereign ? These are
his general questions, while he avows himself,
at the same time, to be in the service of
France, our mortal foe ; that he is on his way
from Canada to the minister of the French
republic, at Philadelphia, to acquaint him
with what he then knew, with the result of
his researches. Gentlemen, these are promi-
nent features of that inconsistency which
marks the defence. In other particulars it
is equally evident. The visit to the mountain
of Montreal bears no aflfinity to trade ; it is
examined by him not in a commercial but in
a military point of view, and in this view he
observes upon it to Cushing. The proposal
to distribute laudanum amongst the kine's
troops, the intended use of pikes, — not to oe
opposed to the musket or bayonet, but appro-
priated, I fear, for the more dreadful purpose
of assassination,— the organization of the
numbers he proposed to engage under ten
men of influence, cannot be considered as
mercantile transactions, nor can thejr for a
moment be supposed to have relation to
peaceable concerns of any description. Gen-
tlemen, if the inquiries were in fact merely
commercial, yet, the peculiar conduct of the
prisoner, when he puts them, is such as would
induce the strongest suspicion of guilt. On
that I have already remarked ; I have only
to add that the inquiries themselves far from
being commercial, are as strong evidences of
guilt, as the black and mysterious conduct
with which they were accompanied ; both
united, convince and take from the mind every
shadow of doubt.

The prisoner, aware that the naper he pro-
duced to Cushing mustbearhara against him,
has attempted, by an improbable story, to ex-
plain it : it is extraordinary that he does not
even recollect the name of'^the clerk by whom,
he says, it was signed, while the witness
Cushing, pointedly swears, that it was signed,
" Adet." But he is not singular in this in-
stance ; the whole of his defence is contra-
dicted by the evidence for the crown, and
stands totally unsupported by any evidence in
its favour. He attempts to account for fre-
nuent visits to Philadelphia ; from whence is
tnis solicitude? why is an attempt made to
account for visits not charged a^inst him ?
The reason is obvious. Philadelphia is the
residence of the French minister; and the
connexion between the visits to that city and
the journies to Canada is too striking to
escape notice : he saw that unfavorable mfe*

791] S7 GEORGE HI.

rencec might be drawn and he has endea-
voured to give Ihem a colour which they will'
not take. He has also attempted to account
for his various visits to Canada ; but this was
not necessary, he is not accused for having
visited Canada once or oflener ; his intention
to overthrow the government of the country,
to which he came under the appearance of an
innocent stranger, is the crime of which he
Stands siccused.

Gentlemen, the prisoner unfortunately for
himself, has wished to speak in his own de-
fence, and has admitted points which his
counsel would not have allowed; he has
strensthened the evidence^ of the crown, by
what he has advanced in justification ot his
conduct ; for, as I have observed, he has ad-
mitted nearly the substance of the evidence
against him. I shall point this out in some
particulars. — He admits his visits last summer
to Canada and his return this spring, under
the assumed name of Felt ; the several meet-
ings with Barnard, Cushing, Butterfield, Cban-
donet, Frichette, and Black ; — the conversa-
tion with Chandonct respecting; Uie political
state of the oountry, with Cushm^ respecting
the certificate firomMr. Adet; with Butter-
field, respecting the sending for Frichette,
with Frichette, respecting an expected revolt
of the Canadians and arming them with pikes
in case of a revolution, and with BlacK re-
specting the capture of Quebec. These admis-
sions are made with many others. In short,
fentlemen, knowing the truth of what has
een submitted to you, he cannot controvert
it ; he admits all, except those parts of the
evidence which amount to direct proof of trea-
son ; and these his personal safety forbids him
to acknowledge t they must, however, be an-
swered, and he opposes to them an explana-
tory defence, unconnected, improbable, and
totally unsupported by evidence, while he
states at the same moment that he has no-
thing to object against the credibility of the
witnesses produced on the part of the crown.
Gentlemen, what his counsel have said is
but little; but I know not in such a case,
how that little has been collected. It is how-
ever my duty to pay as much attention to
their arguments, as to those of the prisoner in
person. I perfectly agree with them that the
case is most important, and requires the roost
serious consideration. I, as readily, admit
that their task is most arduous ; they are
called upon, by their professional duty, to
weave a defence without materials. In the
prosecution of that duty they have first en*
deavoured to prove that the prisoner is a
foreigner. If any advantage is to be derived
from this fact, they must receive it from the
Court, not from you. Whether the prisoner
stands exonerated by law from the gdilt of
treason because he is an alien, is clearly a point
of law. He is an alien, they say, ami tnere-
fore candour and liberality ought to distin-
guish the trial; the obsi|rvation is just, they

c^uMf ought; but tb9ugb tbey vse ibe

Trial ofDatM Madane

1798

words candour and liberality, they kcobh
mend to you partiality : but this u a recom-
mendation to which they could not expect
your attention. Incline as favourably to the
prisoner as his case will allow, but remember
that you cannot acquit a foreigner on evi-
dence that vrould convict a native. — ^Tfaey
have said that there is no proof of his inten-
tion to kill the king personally. I beg to be
understood, I have never advanced such an
absurdity; I refer to what I said at the open-
ing of the evidence, it is the political, not the
natural death, of the soverei» at which the
prisoner has aimed. They nave also said
that there is no proof of his having aided or
assisted the enemies of the king : the cases of
Francis Henry de la Motte, Florence Hensey,
William Gregg, and Thomas Vaughan, which
have been cited, are directly in point ; no
actual aid in either of these cases was given :
their intention to give assistance was held
sufficient to make their treason complete.
They have also said that some of the wit-
nesses are persons that have been accused as
accoropUces with the prisoner in his treason.
It is true, I have brought forward, on the park
of the crown, two witnesses who stand ac-
cused of the crime charged agunst the pri-
soner, and from their own mouths yoii have
heard that they were engaged by him for the
express purpose of overthrowing the estir-
blished system of our government with a
view to subject us to the power and dominion
of the French republic. But notwithstanding
this, they are sufficient witnesses in law. In
the case of Layer, to which in the course of
this trial I have oAen referred. Lynch and
Flunkett, both accomplices, were heard, and
Layer was convicted. A verdict may be given
on the oath of a single witness, but the oath
of an accomplice, corroborated by the testi*
mony of one unsuspected witness has been
always held sufficient. In this case it remains
with you, gentlemen, to affix that degree of
belief'^ to the testimony of the accomplices,
which in your consciences, you think proper.
I will however remark, that the evidence of
Butterfield and Frichette, is by no means
weak ; they do not stand alone, the^ are sup-
ported by the united testimonies of Barnard,
Cushing, Chandonet and Black. As to
Frichette particularly, permit me to observe,
that vou must have seen with what reluct-
ance he deposed against the prisoner; this is
surely the strongest proof that he ought to be
believed in aline has sworn against hinw—
Gentlemen, I have heard with regret the con-
duct of the jurors in the cases of Thomas
Hardy and others latd^ decided in London,
held up as examples for your imitation. I
will not venture m^ own opinion upon the
conduct of those juries, but will appeal to the
opinion of the justly celebrated Mr. Burke,
who, in a lat^ publication, has observed witli
an eye to these trials. ^ that public prosecu-
tions are become but little better than schools

for ueasppi of DO U9e but U) improve Ibe det^

795}

Jbr High Tnoifm.

A. a 1797.

[7M

terity of crindnali in the mystery of emsiooy
or \o show with what unpunity men ma^
conspire affBinst the government and consti-
iDtion of tneir countiy."

Gentlemen, I must yet detain you a mo»
ment ; remark that the evidence on the part
of the crown is complete. The original trea-
sonable design of the prisoner aninst the
king's government is establish^ by the
united testimony of Barnard, Cushine, Chan-
donet, Butterfield, and Frichette, five wit-
nesses whose depositions coincide in every
particular; his- return into the province and
journey to Quebec, for the purpose of putting
thatdesi^ in execution, is proved by butter-
field, Fnchette^ and Black. On a case so
clearly proved by positive testimony, not
controverted by any evidence on the part of
the prisoner, I am confident you cannot en-
tertain a doubt.

Summing up.

The Honourable Chief Justke Oigoode,'^
Gendenien of the Jury ; The prisoner at the
bar, David Maclane, Stands indicted of the
crime of high treason. The indictment con-
tains two counts or charges; the first, for
compassing the king's death, the second for
adhering to the king's enemies; and in order
to make good these chaines, fourteen several
overt acts or evidences ottreason are imputed
to him, the substance of which is,

1. That he conspired with divers persons
unknown, to solicit the enemies of the king
to invade the province.

9. That he did solicit the king's enemies
to invade the province.

S. That he conspired with the kin^s ene-
mies to excite a rebellion in the province, to
invade the province with ships and armed
men.

4. That he conspired with divers persons
unknown, to ruse a rebellion in the province,
to aid and assist and to seduce tho king's
subjects to aid and assist the enemy in an
hostile invasion of the province.

5. That he solicitea and incited divers of
the king's subjects to levy war and rebellion
against the king in his province of Lower
CSuada, and to aid and assist the enemy in
an hostile invasion of the same province.

6r That he solicited and incited divers f>er-
eons not beine subjects, to levy war asainst
the king in his province, and to aia and
assist the enemy m an hostile invasion of
the province.

7. That he made ready and raised several
men unknown, to levy war against the king,
within the province, and to assist the enemy
in an hostile invasion.

8. That he conspired with divers persons,
unknown, to convey into the province arms
and .tunmunition. with intent therewith to
wage war against the king ; and to assist the
enemy in an hostile invasion.

9. That he collected informatwn whedier
Ahe king's sMlgtcts w^e or wpre not well

affected, and whether thev woukl or would
not join the enemy in an hostile invasion of
the province, with intent to communicate it
to the enemy.

10. That he acquired knowledse of the
strength of the king's city called Montreal,
and now it mieht m attacked and taken by
the enemy, wim intent to communicate it to
the enemy.

11. That, being possessed of the informa-
tion and knowledge set forth in the two last-
mentioned overt acts, he departed from the
parish of Quebec towards fordgn parts, with
mtent to communicate it to the enemy.

IS. That he entered the parish of I^otre
Dame de Quebec, &c. secretly and clandes-
tinely under the feigned and assumed name
of Jacob Felt.

13. That he conspired with divers persons
unknown, to seize by surprise, the walled and
garrisoned dty of Quebec, one of the king's
fortresses or fortified places, to cause a mi-
serable slaughter of and destroy the king's
fiuthfiil subjects, and to deliver the city into
the hands of the enemy, for the ud and as-
sistance of the enemy in the present war.

14. That he entered the walled and garris-
soned city of Quebec, with intent to seise it
by surprise, to cause a miserable slaughter, and
to destroy the king's futhfiil subjects; and to
deliver the citv into the hands of the enemy,
for the aid and assistance of the enemy in the
present war.

These overt acts are charged under each
count, and are laid in order to prove each
species of treason.

Perhaps, gentlemen, at this distance fit>m
the place of the king's personal residence,
you may think it unreasonable to impute to
the prisoner the crime which constitutes the
first charge brought against him, namely that
of compassing the king's death; but, if the
foots laid, are found to be true in contempla-
tion of law, they have a tendency to that
fotal end ; and such compassing always forms
a charee in indictments for this sort of trea-
son. True it is, that the overt acts seem to
range themselves most naturally under the
second count, for adhering to the kin^s ene-
mies, which is a distinct and poritive head of
treason. If then you find any difficulty in
referring the acts charged to the first count
you may, if you think proper, direct your at-
tention to the evidence given as tending to
prove the second count in the indictment,
which contains the charge of a declared trea-
son and is therefore sufficient, if found, to
support a conviction.

Gentlemen, it ought to be a matter of sa-
tisfoction, both to the court and the jury, that
from a repeated course of determinations on
this subject, the law is perfectly clear, and
that we are travelling upon a well trodden
path. The words of tne statute are in them*
selves plain and intelligible.— If a man do
adhere to the king's enemies, giving them aid
and assistance in the realm^ or elsewhere it \9

79S] S7 GEORGE IH.

declared to be treason^. Such is ihe i^xt, but
the cases that have been determined under
this clause, go a considerable degree farther ;
for it is not necessary, in order to complete
the crime, that the aid and assistance should
be actually given, nay, it is not necessanr to
be proved^ as I shall explain to you by and by ;
bat it is necessary that you should see that
the aid and assistance was intended and thai
you should find if 80» On the subject %f in-
tention, the distinction that was made by the
attorney general, respecting the nature of
crimes, by the English law, ts certainly true,
that crimes in general are not consummate
by the intention, and that the;^ must, in order
to complete the guilt, be carried into execu*
tion ; but that treason is an exception to this
rule : — there is no doubt, that the observation,
generally speaking, is just ; for, an attempt to
commit larceny, robbery, or murder, does not
constitute the capital crime, yet there is a
capital crime which is not unfrequently
brought before a court of justice, and of
course the natut*e of it must have been
often explained in your hearing, gentlemen,
which oflbrs the strongest analogy to high
treasoni^andniay thereiore give you a better
insigbt- into it, I mean the crime of burglary.
Burglary is defined to be the breaking and en*
tering into a dwelling house by ni^t, with
intent ta commit a felony ; it is not necessary
that any thing should be canied away, not
even of the value of this pen ; but the intent
is left fop the finding of the jury, from
the nature of the overt acts proved; if
evidence be given of the breaking and en*
tering^ tbete are overt acts sufficient to call
upon the jury to determine with what intent
this was dorie ; 4md if they believe it was with
a feloAioiis intent, the (rime is complete,
tbongb,- as I said before, no property is car-
ried awsfy. So in the case of treason, if a
tniilonoos intention is disclosed by words or
writings, and they are followed up bv anv
acts tending to execute such design, although
it be not complete, it is sufficient to ground
a charge of treason, and it is left to the
oalhs and conscience of a jury to say with
what view such a step was taken, although
the party is stopped short before the final
purpose was carried into effect ; for, common
sense tells us. we oueht not to wait till the
mischief is mnpleted.

Gentlemen, I am well apprized that it is
not customary for the bench to cite authori*
rities for the opinions they deliver tn the jury%
It being the du^ of the bench to exphin the
law, due credit is expected for the opinioqs
theydiscbse, and 1 am happy to say that
nine, since I have had the honour of a seat,
have hitlierto ahrayi met with a fitvourable
acceptance ; yet, as in a trial of such' expec-
tation and iomrtanoe it cannot be but satis-
faototy to know what has been held on
like*ooeasioils, I shall not think it unbeoom*
ing'lo show, by cases re8orved,that the doc-
trim I advance haaloog since been deelaredi

Trial of David Madam

[79ff

acted upon, and confirmed by the most re»-
pectable characters that have administeredthe
English law. Soon after the abdication of
James the 3nd, lord Preston and two other
gentlemen embarked on the Thames for
France, with a written plan, in order to in-
duce Louis 14th to invaae England, pointing
out the minaber of men requisite and the time
and place fittest for the attack ; they were
taken a little below Gravesend, and though
the design was not carried into efiect, it was
laid down by lord Holt and chief justice Pol-
lexfen, as clear law without qucsUon, ** if any
persons do go into France to negotiate such a
design as this, or do purpose to go into France
and do any act in order thereunto, that is
high treason."* Lord Preston was told from
the bench *' you took water at Surrey stairs,
which is in the coun^ of Middlesex, and
every step you made in pursuance of this
journey, is treason, wherever it was.'^f These

1>arties were convicted (although they yrere
eaving the kingdom) of compassingthe king's
death, as well as of adhering to his enemies.
The same law was laid down in the case of
Vaughan,t who went cruising under a French
commission, and thoueh he had taken no-
thing, he waif convictra and executed. In
Sieen Ann's time it was discovered, that one
regg, a clerk in the secretary of state's of^
fice, nve information to Chaniillard, the
French minister, of some expedition that wad
intended against Louis the 14th, his letters
were intercepted, and on these overt acts he
was indicted of compassing the queen*s death
and of SKlhering to her enemies ; he pleaded
guilty to the charge and was executed.^ Thesd
cases are all mentioned by sir Michael Foster
in his excellent discourse en Uigh Treason,
where he draws this conclusion, t&t the en-
tering into measures in concert with foreign*
ers and others, in order to effect an invasion
of the kingdom, or going mto a foreign coun«
try, or even purposing to go thither to that
end, and takmg any steps, in order thereto,
these offences are overt acts of both species of
treason. Another case, which carries the
matters still farther happened in the reign
of George the 9nd, which was Florence
Ilensey*scase. He was indicted of compas«
sing the king's death and adhering to his ene-
mies. The chief evidence against him were
certain letters that were intercepted at thd
post office, and never reached the place of des-
tination. This might perhaps be thought a
strong circumstance in mitigation : but you
shall bear what brd Mansfield sakl at the
trial, which I will read to you.

** As to the law. Levying war is an overt
act of compassing the death of the king: an
overt act of the intention of levying war, or of

* See Lord Preston's case, anth. Vol. 19|
p. 7S7.
t See Vol. la, p. 799.
X Aniif Vol. 13, p. 485.
§ See his caee^ ante, Vol. 14, p. 1371.

7871

fi3fr High Treagom

A. D. 1797.

t79»

bringing war upon Ihe kingdom, is settled to
be ail overt act of compassing the king's deatb.
Soliciting a foreign prince, even in amity with
this crown, to invade the. realm, is such an
overt act, and so was cardinal Pool's case.
And one of these letters is such a solicitation
of a foreign prince to invade the realm.

** Letters of ad vice and correspondence, and
intelligence to the enemy, to enable them to
annoy us or defend themselves, written, and
sent, in order to be delivered to the enemy,
are, though intercepted, overt acts of both
these species of treason that have been men-
tioned. And this was determined by all the
judges of £ngland in Gregg's case; where the
indictment (which I have seen) is much like
the present indictment. The only doubt
there, arose from the letters of intelligence
being intercepted and never delivered ; but,
they held t/uU ihtU circumstance did tMt aUer
ihe case,'"*

Gentlemen, perhaps you may think I have
taken too wide a field, but I am desirous that
you should know the opiniop of the twelve
judges of England, on a case that might ap-
pear to be attended wiihfavourable circumstan-
ces. It is certainly going much farther than
is necessary on the present occasion. I will
therefore endeavour to make amends by fix-
ing your attention to the point of law which
ought to govern the present case, and which I
think may be comprised in one sentence,
which is this : every attempt to subject thb
province, or any part thereof, to the king's
enemies, is high treason, and every step
taken in furtherance of such attempt is an
overt act of high treason. Here, gentlemen,
is a plain text to assist you in uronouncing
your verdict. Tb(B law on the subject is clear
and intelligible, and it rests with you to de-
termine, whether o|r do the overt acts charged
in the indictment, or any one of them, was
done in furtherance of the treason imputed to
the prisoner. It b my duty, gentlemen, fiir-
ther to observe to vou, that by a statute pas-
sed in the reign of king William, it is enacted
that no person shall be attainted of high trear
son but upon the testimony of two lawfiil
witnesses to the same overt act, or one of
them to one, and the other of them to ano-
ther overt act of the same treason. These,
gentlemen, are the most material points
of the law upon the case which il is my duty
to mention to you. There is likewise ano-
ther circumstance necessaiy to be observed
in this particular case, which is, the allegation
contained in the indictment, that open war is
yet carrying on between our sovereign lord
the king and the persons exercising the powers
of government in France. No formal evi-^
dence has been offered to prove this fiut, be-
cause pvblic notoriety has always been held as
sufficient, evidence in such cases ; and it will

* See Hensey's case, anii. Vol. j9, p. 1344.
See also the cases of Jackson and Stone, anti,
Vol. 35, pp. 783, 11^5.

not occupy much of your time, gentlesien, to
determine whether the fact exists.

Having laid down these principles, it be*
comes your duty, gentlemen, to apply them
to tlie facts given in evidence, in proof of the
overt acts charged in the indictment. To as*
sist your recol&ction I will recapitulate the
evidence as I have taken it down ; making
such observations as may occur to me in the
course of it ; but in so doing I beg it may be
recollected, that you are by no means bound
to adopt them : if you think them pertinent
and applicable, allow them weight; if other-
wise you will pass them over. In matters of
law you are bound by the judgment of the
co|iirt ; but in matters of/ad, you are to juclge
of the credit due to the witnesses that have
been brought forward : you are to impute the
overt acts given in evidence, to such motives
as you thiiik they may be fairly ascribed ; for
it is you who are to make the true deliver*
ance.

The first witness called on the part, of the
prosecution, is William Barnard, who says-*
*< I know the prisoner at the bar ; the first
time I saw him was in July, 1796, in th«
state of Vermont, near the Province Line ; it
was almost dark : the prisoner told me he
wished tp have some conversation with me ;
I stept on one side with him ; he said he
wished to be out of sight ; we walked upon
the shore of the lake : he said he had some-
thing of great importance which lie wished to
communicate, in the doing of which he put
his life in my hands." Gentlemen, you will
find in the progress of the evidence that the
prisoner made this sprioiis kind of address to
several of the witnesses, which is a strong
proof that he was well aware of the crimina*.
lity of the business he came about The wit^
ness goes on—'* I desired him then not to do
it : be said I might think it singular thai a
strancer should address himself in that
way, out that I was not a stranger to him.
He mentioned some circumstances which
showed he had taken some pains to find me
out: that I had been recommended to him as
a person whom ho could. trust with a secret :
He desired me not to divulge it, which I pro-
mised. He then said his business there was,
to bring about a revolution in Canada: that
he wanted some person to take the lead;
that if I would imaertake it, he would make
my fortune : this was on the 26th of July. I
asked him who recommended him to me; he
would not tell who it was. I told him it was
a plot of some enemy to ruin me, I was not
his man, and turned short about ; he requested
me not to say any thing about it; that he
should be in Montreal in a few days, when,
perhaps, I should think better of it About
four or five days after, 1 saw him at Montreal;
be asked me if I had thought of what he had
mentioned to me at the Lints : I told him not
much. He said, when I came to know who
he was, he hoped I should think difierently,
but if I would engage not to take an acttT*

799]

37 GEORGE III.

Trial of David Madane

[800

pvl I should be protected. This was the sub-
stance of which I informed Mr. Maocord, a
magistrate. I was at La Prairie in November
lasty about the 7th ; it is about three leagues
firom Montreal. I then met the prisoner ; I
had previously seen him a few days, but had
no conversation with him. He then told me
1 must think differently of that matter than
what I had done in Summer. I told him
there had been some disturbances like what
he had been talking about; He said those
disturbances were against their cause ; he said
this was certainly a conquered country, for
there would be an army here in the Spring.
He then said, if he could depend on me he
wouM tell me something farther; that he
wished me to take an active part in it ; I said
I would not" Now, gentlemen, if you be*
lieve this witness, this is the second time he
mentions a solicitation on the part of the pri-
soner, that he, the witness, should assist the
enemy in the projected invasion, which is
the 5th overt act charged in the indictment.
The witness speaking of the prisoner, goes on
to say—'' He said I might be of service and
need not appear in it, by finding out where
the seminary and the merchants kept their
money. He wished me to sound the minds
of the people, to know who were likely to be
their friends ; and that I would use my influ-
ence among the Canadians to keep them still
this winter; that a blow would be strode in
the Spring, at a time when it would not be
eipected. They wished to confine all those
ag^st them, as they did not wish to take
any person's life." ^

On his cross-examination, he said, he had
no promise from eovemroent, and that the
prisoner told him ne was a subject of the
Unit^ States* I observed that several of the
witnesses are examined to this point, and upon
tlie whole it appears to be sufficiently esta-
blished ; but what use is to be made of this
fact I cannot immediately discover. By the
testimony of tliis witness, as well as of every
other, it appears that the prisoner was a sc.
journer in the province, he therefore owed an
allegiance to the king whilst he remained
within the king's dominions, in return for the
protection he experienced, aud for the secu-
rity with which he possessed his life and pro-
|»erty. It will not, I trust, be made a ques-
tion, whether, havine availed himself of the
benefit of our laws, be is at liberty to trans-
gress them, because he is a subject of a foreign
state, or that that can be offer^l in exte-
nuation.

The next witness on the part of the crown,
gentlemen, is Elmer Cushmg, who is a Bri-
tish subject, who has known the prisoner ten
or eleven years. He says — ** I saw the pri-
soner at my house on the 5th November last,
at Montr^; he came before breakfast; I
was absent when he came ; he took his break-
fast, went out, and returned between three
and four o'clock. I observed his cloaths co-
vered with small burrs; I asked him where

he had been f he answered upon the mountain
of Montreal, and observed that it might b«
made a place of great command over Mon-
treal, in case of war. He then began to talk
of the situation of the country. I observed
the Canadians had made a considerable dis«
turbance, and seemed to be disaffected ; on
this, he said, he should wish to have some
private conversation with me : I retired into
a private room with him. He informed roe
he had a secret which he wished to impart to
me, which was of the utmost consequence;
he would not mention it unless I would swear
never to reveal it. I said my word was suffi-
cient ; he said be could not reveal it unless I
would first swear, for he was putting his life
into my hands." — Here you ooserve, gentle-
men, the same solemn address that was made
to the last witness by the prisoner, which
shows he was well aware of the danger
of his enterprise. — ^* I said the secret might
be of prejudice to me ; he answered, he. could
make it advantageous: I then told him I
would conceal it ; he made me make a solemn
promise not to reveal his name. He then told
me there would be a severe attack upon this
province early in the Spring, that would at
once overthrow the present British govern-
ment ; that he had been employed in it ever
since he had been in this country, and was so
still : he said the attack would be made by a
fleet from France with ten or fifteen thousand
men ; he said that the fleet then on the coast
was intended for the attack next year, but that
the season was too advanced ; he said lie was
employed by Adet the French minister at
Philadephia, and that he had somethingwhich
would convince me he was not acting without
authority. He got his saddle-baes and took a
pair of shoes out of them, one of which had
a hole on the outside sole, near the toe. He
pulled a paper out from betwixt the two
soles, which was si^ed Adtt. It was written
in an obscure style m English, and was a cer-
tificate that he Adet, was concerned in the
family affiura of the prisoner." — Now, een-
tlemen, if you believe this account ot the
witness, it certainly forms a circumstance of
such suspicion, as to require seme deliberation
on its import. The equivocal language of
the paper, the place where it was deposited,
are matters to which your observation need
not be called. Family concerns, the conduct
of a lawsuit, or the purchase or sale of goods,
is the usual pretence for a correspondence to
carry on dark purposes. The witness appears
to be struck with this, for he says — ** I asked
the prisoner why the paper was written in that
stjrle ? he answered it was a dangerous piece
of business to go upon, and if the paper should
be found upon him, it could not ne produced
in evidence. Maclane's name was in the pa-
per : he said it was a draft of his own, and
that Mr. Adet would have signed any paper
he pleased. He said there was no occasion
for a regular commission till matters came to
the test; that he had just come from the

8013

Jot High Treason,

French Ihinister, and should immediately re-
turn to Philadelphia on his leaving Montreal,
where he ithould receive his orders and im-
mediately set sail for France ; that he should
not return to Montreal till Spring, to take the
command in that quarter/' — Now, gentle-
men, should you believe the testimony of this
-witness, and I do not find any attempt made
to impeach his credit, here is abundant evi-
ilence to prove the third overt act charged
a^rainst the prisoner — that he conspired with
the king's enemies to invade this province ;
and this evidence is confirmed by the next
^witness, who swears to a conversation with
the prisoner, in which the prisoner acquainted
him that he was employed by the French mi-
nister for the same purpose ; so that here are
two witnesses to one and the same, namely,
tlie third overt act. The witness, gentlemen,
goes on to say — ** The prisoner told me the
attack was to be made at Quebec and Mon-
treal at one and the same time ; that the first
object would be, to secure the money and va-
luable property, to defray the expenses of the
•war: and next to secure all the priests and
leading characters in the province, effectually
to secure, was the word : he said that those
who were favourable to the cause should be
protected in person and property ; and as for
those who were adverse, it would fare hard
'With them. That he should be with a number
of persons under him at Quebec, to be got in
in rafts or whatever way he could, for the
purpose of breeding a mutiny, and spiking the
caimonalthe time the attack should be made :
.he did not expect to need the Canadians till
the blow was struck. That he himself was
to command at Montreal : that arms and am-
munition were to be furnished throng the
States, by the French minister Adet at Phila-
.delpbia. He informed me he had a number
of inen In the States, who had engaged to
furnish a numbetof men each, which were to
come in and assist at the attack." — ^This,
gentlemen, goes to establish the fourth overt
act — ^* He assured me that I might look upon
this as a conquered country; for the French
were determined to have it by conquest or
treaty. He wished to engage me to take an
active part in the business, that i should have
any standing or any reward I would wish to
accept of.''— 'Here, gentlemen, is evidence to
the same overt act thai was sworn to by the
.first witness Barnard, which, I think, is the
fifth — that he solicited divers of the king's
subjects to join in the projected rebellion, and
fully establishes the proof of that overt act
likewise by two witnesses. — ** He sakl if I
.would give any information respecting the
copotry, X should 4x: protected in person and
property ; I told him I wpuld make no pro-
miseSy nor have any thing to do with il. He
.said, you can certainly do this to t|uiet the
minds of the Canadians till spring ; for all
this disturbance of the Road act is detrimental
*to tha cause. Ha then said he had gone as
:fiu:a6 he could do, Ainless I would promise to
VOL. XXVI.

A. D. 1797. f802

take an active part : that if I would do so, he
had other matters to reveal ; but if ever I re-
vealed what he had said, my life would be
taken immediately. He said I might alter
my mind, and if any one should come and
tell me he came to talk on family matters, I
mieht depend on not being deceived."

On being cross-examined, he says, he came
down last fall to give information of a plot
against government, but that he never men-
tioned Maclane*s name ; that the prisoner it
generally reputed to be an American subject.

Gentlemen, the evidence of this witness
and the last is very material ; they confirm
each other in the general account ot the pro-
ject, and if minutely scrutinized, might he
found to prove many of the overt acts charged .
I have pointed out one or two of them, on
which there can be little doubt, should you
believe their testimony.

The next witness, gentlemen, is Francis
Chandonet,a subject of the United States,;
He says — " The first time I saw the prisoneV*
was last summer. In the beginning of the
winter I saw him again: he came to a plac^
about three quarters of a league above the
Line, in the United States ; he met me on the
bank of the Lake : he asked me if my name
wasChandonet; I answered, yes : he asked
me to take a walk with him, as he had some-
thing to communicate in private. He told
me he was upon business of the utmost im-
portance, and that he was recommended to
me as a proper person to take a part in it,
but I must promise never to divulge it; I
told him I would make no such promise till T
knew the business ; he said it was of a poli-
tical nature, which made it necessary. I again
refused ; he said I would not be accessary to
the taking away a person^s life, therefore he
would go on. He then told me he was em-
ployediDy the French to go into Canada, and
feel the minds of the people, to see how they
were affected to the present governiuent,
which business he had already begun, and
foimd that a large body of the Canadians
could be raised, to have an insurrection in
the country."— This evidence, if believed,
proves the ninth overt-act charged in the in-
tiictment; that the prisoner collected intelli-
gence respecting the disposition of the king's
subjects towards his government, with intent
to communicate it to the enemy, provided
always, that you, gentlemen, believe it was
I with such intent The witness goes on, that
— '< The prisoner said he had learned I was

going to hve on the river St Lawrence, near
t. Regis ; that, that would be a ver^r suitable
place ior such a person, if I would join him
to carry on his plan, which was to secrete a
quantity of arms and ammunition in rafts, in
the spring of the year, both by lake Champa-
lain, and the river St. Lawrence ; that a quan-
tity of arms and ammunition might be con-
cealed in rails in Chateaugay river; that
those would be the safest as supposed to coni«
from Upper Canada.''-*Th)s, you wiUobscrve,
3 F

805] S7 GEORGE III.

gentlemen^ goes to Uie eighth ovcrt-aci
charged. The witness proceeds, that " the
prisoner said, he had a brother coming to tlie
Lines, vvith a large quantity of dry goods;
that these goods ivcre for collecting a store
of provisions against the insurrection^ wliich
would furnish him with a good excuse to go
backwards and forwards, without being sus-
pected. He pressed me to take apart which
I would not : he then told me it I was to
divulge any thing of the transactioni be must
inevitably be hung.*'

On his cross- examination, the witness says,
he is a Canadian by birth, that he lefl Canada
with the American army in the year J776,
being promised a commission, which be had,
and was afterwards naturalised. That he was
taken up upon suspicion, and sent ontof the
province as an alien ; but that, conscious of
his innocence, he wrote to Mr. Richardson,
tbe magistrate at Montreal, that he was ready
to take his trial upon any charge that could
)^ brought against him; that, upon coming
into the provmce, he was subpcsaacd to give
evidence.

Gentlemen, the next witness that is called
is Thomas Butlerfield, who is a subject of the
United St^es, and lives in Vermont He sav
the prisoner in November last, and savs, that
'^ the prisoner asked me to take a walk, and
told me he had a matter to inform me of,
provided I would keep my counsel, it would
be of advantage to me ; he informed nie he
iiad been in Canada, in order to sound the
minds of the Canadians, and to see if they
were willing to rise and take the province out
of the British hands : that he had been in
before, in the course of the summer, and had
oeen out to Philadelphia on the same busi-
ness; he told me he was employed by the
Prcnch minister Adet, and that he was then
returning to him min at Philadelphia; that
he had been into Montreal ; that the minds
of the people were ready and willing; to lend
« hand to surprise the country, provided they
had any one to lead Ibem; he told me he was
then going to Philadelphia to Adet, with that
information.''^Here gentlemen, is theAillest
corroboration of what the other witnesses
have sworn respectine the ninth overt^act.-r
" I asked hlin if he nad any one he could
depend on, he answered one Black or Blake,
and mentioned a number of oth^s that he
had seen ; he mentioned onp Barnard, whom
1 did not know : that he was going to make
his returns of what he had done in this
country, to Adet at Philadelphia; I under-
stood him, that he had alelterfroni one Black
or Blake to Adet, bnt 1 did not see it. We
had some conver^tion about taking Quebec ;
the prisoner seemed to think, if that could be
got It would do ; and proposed bringing in a
Aumber of people upon rafts : be told me lie
should go on his journey, and expected to be
bai;k about April or fAw. I undertook to
engage with him in the taking of tbe country.
About tbe 2K)ih April he returned tn3wuitoBr^

Trial ff David Madam

[804

and came to a laTem close to my houH. Up

fave me a wink IP atep aside, aiked ne if I
ad been in Canada dunnc the winter; I laad
not ; he asked, whether I had beard his name
mentioned as to any disooveiy ; I told hkn
not: be said he had heard he WM discoveied
in Canada, and that it was not safe for him to

go in. Next morning be naked me to aaaiat
im with a boat and two hands to so to lale
la Motte ; I procured tbe b^ds for nim. On
the 96tb or S7th of Apri), be «ngi^ me to
go to St. John^s in Canada, to fetch Frichette
to him. He gave me money for my cxpenmi^
and I did my errand and hrought Frichotto?
they walked out together, after which be toM
me he had determined to go into Canada with
Frichette. The prisoner toM me, the money
I gave you was not for your pay, bui for your
expenses ; your pay wul begm from the time
you undertook."— This, gentlemen, is evi-
dence on the seventh overt-act, which chaifes
the prisoner with enUsting several peraonsw—
" He told me, that be and Frichette wero to
go to Quebec to view th^plaeoy and lay sooie
pian to take the place; but what plan be
could not sav, till he had seen the place: he
told me be had left all his paper9 with hia
brother at Mr. ScoviU'ss that Scovill bad
uMived to Swanton, to make a home for him
and his people."

On his cross-examination, he says, " I first
saw the prisoner about last April was a vear,
I do not Know whether he is a sulgect of the
United States, he told me so ; he told me be
was born in Boston. X was taken up in May
last, for aiding and assisting this Madane,
and was sent down in custody." An objection
was made, gentlemen, to this witness's tes-
timony, on the ground of his being an accom-
plice : if this doctrine were to be allowed, it
would be a very difficult matter ever to obtain
a conviction in a case of high treason. Men
engaged in treasonable attempts, do not pub-
lish uieir intentions at the marlMl crosa. H
is very rare that direct testimony can be had
from persons not implicated in the crime.
In the trials upon the assassina&bn plot in
king William's time, every witness, aa ftr aa
I can recollect, was an accomplioe; they are
admitted for neeessit/s sake, or the moat
dangerous treasons might pass unpunished, it
certainly is an imputation upon their credi-
bility, and the jury are to determine on th^
extent of it, but it is equally certain, that it
does not affect their competency.

The next witness callea is Charles Frichette.
Ue says, *' I know the prisoner : I saw him
first in June 1706, by the name of Maclane :
he came to n^ house at 6t. Jplm's, and asked
if I knew one Frichette ; I said I am the ptiN
son. Have you any borseaf Yes. We went
into the field : ha asked roe if I could leep a
secret, and was an honest man : I told htta
not to trust me iuo much; he -said he had n
secret which he could not tell without an
oath: lieokanoalhr.hrnakadiflwoi^dgoto
Philadelphia or to France : I iidced ioi what :

Af High Treason.

tOS]

k0 nid, to lat Ibe iPreach inifii^tor: I
M^itwAStoofiurs beMkediaeifloould pro-
aire a sigDttMire of five or six honest persons ;
I asked why; be said, U> show there were
snore people who wished for a change of go-
Temment^ than were conlented wtlb the pre*
am ^ernmeot : I said, it was impossible.
He bid me not be afraid, Ihathe was an officer
In the French army. He asked repeatedly
Iqr the certificate : but I did not procure it.
ikboiit the end of April» ButterfieM came for
moi I went to Macladc: he gave me a good
ispeeption s he asked what news in Canada ; I
said none; if he misht go thither: I said yes:
Me then said we wul go to£etber» perhaps to
Quebec : we agreed to go^ out did not go by
St. John's: we passed Mhind the Fort at day
break, and proceeded on the south shore road
to St. Nicholas: we had much conversation :
he sud the country wanted some English
ihrmers for its improvement. He asked me
why the prisoners in gaol at Quebec were
eoimnedy and whether I thought the Cana-
dians would revolt ; I said no, they were not
veiy warlike^ nor desirous of war: he did not
tsllme he was come to make a revolt: he
laughed when he spoke about a revolt: he
•deed me if I knew one Black a member of
the parliament; I said no: he afterwards
told me he was coitie to take Quebec : I said,
if I thought so, I would so back; he said he
dJd not mean to hurt any body, that if he had
JOe men with pikes of wood, 6 or 7 feet long,
he woidd take the town : this was said at St
MMholas : he desired me to ask my brother
respecting the people in Quebec, why they
wbM in ^no^; I mdao ; he told me for making
teturteDMS about the Bond act: we came to
QnriMC tenther, landed at Wolfe's Cove : he
eent, me tor Mr. Black : I fbund him, and
took bun to Madane : be desired Mr. Black
In eicttse the liberty he had takeh in sending
tot him, being a stranger, h^ was afraid of
bfifwaonected : this was about two o'clock
in the aftsraoen : Black then told the pri-
flutter, that I had informed him of the inten-
tion of the joum^i Mr. Black advised him
to{[oboek;nir the Ganadiana were adt worth
dcsng any tidng for : Mr. Bkok asked the
prisoner what plan he -had. for taking the
town ; the [irisoner answered, it is very eaay
to take it with 600 men; that he would take
il^eary easily ; tfiateach-asanmigbt be armed
with a pUce aboiilt six or seven leet - long,
jhoiated with iron, and hardened in /the fire;
and if the town^pates wero open, one com-
pany might come in at one gate, and another
at anotmr gate, and strike at the aame tiime :
hemad the troops would be so surprised, that
th^ would not Jcnow which way to turn: at
this time I fell asleep: when I awoke, I
Iteard the prisoner say to Mr. BUtfk, that
something might be given to the troops to set
them islMp; Mr. fitoek said, that would do
i«cy well, Ibist the grealsT part of the traope
^ems veMMeers, who desired nolbiqg better
than to lay down their trms. He told the

A. D. 1797. £806

priioAer not to W afraid, but to come to hi^
bouse, to dress himself like a geoUeman, sad
take a walk about the town ; at len^ the
prisoner consented to come, but Mr. Black
did not approve of coming in with him, be-
cause he said, he himself was watched, lie
desii^ed me to bring him to his house in tiie
evenings which I accordingly did; the pri-
soner told me to call him FeU ; which I did."
The witness is in custody for high treason.
Gentlemen, you have seen the manner in
which this witness has given his evidence:
he seems to have little knowledge of the
swction of an oath, or at least, little regard
for it, from the disgraceful way in which ho
gave his ievidence. This is one of the advan-
tages of an open examination in the face of
the country. You are to judge of the credit
due to his testimony; but for my own part»
except in roalten whero he is confirmed by
others, and what he has said of evident fact^
I should not be much disposed to believe
him.

The next witness they called, gentlemen^

is John Black. He says, that << FncheUe, the

last witness called, at my house on the tenth

of May last, to know if I would buy any oak

timber, which we barg^oed for ; afterwards

he told me he wanted to speak with me ia

private ; I went with him into another ropm^

when be took me by the hand, svring, You

wiQ be surprised when I tell you I have n»

oak to sell, 1 am come upon a business of a

ouile difierent nature ; then smieesing me by

the hand, be said, are you the Mr. Black that

was in gaol in the year 1794 : I told him I

was : you have been much injured, but your

ii^uries are now almost at an end, the French

and Americans have tidcen up your cause, and

you will soon triumph^ver all your enemies.

I wished to know why he came to me; for

I had already been caught by insidious men ;

then taking me bv both bands, he said, aro

you really to be depended on: I told him I

was to be depended on : then, says he, thero

is a French general within a quarter of a

league from this place, who wishes to have a

conversatkm with you, respecting the taking

of the garrison of Quebec, I asked by what

means; has he an army? he answered no ho

has no army, he wishes to concert measures

with you, and you must come immediately

with flse to see nim. About two o'clock we

set off together on foot across the plains of

Abr^bam, down to Wolfe's Cove, and up Mr.

Mabane's hill: when we came to the side of

the wood, Frichette asked me to go in with

bun, I at first declined it; Frichette went in ;

he came out again shortly after, and I saw

him beckon to me, I tlien went about SOO

yaids into the wood, where I fbund the pri-

soner with a very long beard : he shook hands

with me, and expressed himself glad to see

me,beg|Kd pardon for sending tor me, but

added, that he wished to see me on a matter

of great importance. I think it proper for

me to 4nentiDa here, that I never saw the

8073

37 GEORGIA IIL

Trial ofD'amd Maclant

[SOS

prisoner till I then saw him in tlie wood, nor
nad I ever heard of, or knew there was such a
man in existence; and as I was uucertun in
regard to my situation, when thus in the
wood, I therefore agreed to every meaaure
the prisoner proposed.''--Gentlemen, on this
occasion, the Court think it a matter of
justice due to Mr. Black, thus publicly to
declare their opinion, that through the whole
of this business, he has behaved like a zealous
and faithful subject, and has conducted him-
self with great propriety and discretion, he
goes on to s^v — ** The prisoner then said, his
man had told him, that he had explain^ to
me a part of his plan* My plan, said the
prisoner, is thatof humanity ; I am sorry to see
a great people labouring under the tyranny
ofEngland. I propose to push the British

f^vernment from the continent of America,
asked him by what means ; he answered,
eight or ten men of influence, such as I might
be one, might raise, under plausible pre-
tences, as many people as possible, who at a
certain appointed time, wouldjoin with others,
who were to come in to him /roro the States,
nnder various pretexts of seeking labour, and
that he would arm them with pikes eight
feet in length, headed with iron, and hardened
in the fire, which he considered to be 18
inches longer than the British musket, and
bayonet.'*— 'This, gentlemen, is direct evi-
dence, in support of the ISth and 14th overt-
acts charged, and being thus seriously men-
tioned to this witness by the prisoner, may
explain to you the real drift of his conversa-
tion with Frichette, to whom he did not pro-
bably choose, in the first instance to open his
scheme in positive terms, the witness then

goes on to say, that '* the prisoner thought
Ludanum might be eiven to the troops with
effect : that \& attacE must be sudden ; they
would rush in, but not take a life if possible
to avoid it ; he hoped none would be taken,
but at the same time, for the sake of posterity,
all who resist must fall; he farther observed
to me, we must take care not to injure the
works; for that would render us vulnerable
after we were masters of the garrison." Here,
gentlemen, is an avowal, as express as lan-
guage can make it, of his design to execute
tbe project charged against him in the iSth
and 14th overt^acta — ** The prisoner said, he
left Mr. Adet on the 7lh of April, who was
going to France on the 10th; that both he
and the Spanish minister were concerned in
the measure; observing, that Adet is the
man of business, the Spaniard is a fop: the
prisoner eaid, he had so concerted measures
with Adet, that if we could but possess our-
selves of the garrison by surprise, it could
never be recovered from us, for, he said,
besides the measures taken by the French
and Spaaish ministers, I have 15,000 men at
tbe Lines read^ at a nod, with part of which
I mean to garrison this place, and with the
remainder, perhaps form an expedition against
Halifax. Till the Utter |mrt of our conver*

sation, I understood his name to be Felt ; but
he then gave me two letters, one directed to
John Blackwood, esq. and the other directed
to myself, recommending the prisoner as a
gentleman highly worthy of notice, by the
name of colonel David Maclane ; he told me,
that Mr. Adet was gone to Europe, for the
purpose of bringing a force to co-operate with
the 15,000 men that were to be brought in
from the States: he made great enquiries
concerning the property, public and private,
in Quebec : 1 told him I thought there might
be from three to five hundred thousand pounds :
he said the property was intended to bfs given
to those who should take the city : he told
me that he had been in the province in Oc-
tober last, that the government boasted of
having quelled the tumults at Montreal, but
that in reality it was he that had done it. I*
advised him to come into town after dark ; he
expressed his fears at beine discovered, and
said, that government had offered 500 dollars
for his person : however, he consented and
gave me his pocket-book, in which his name
was written, to prevent detection in case he
was taken. He was conducted by Frichette
to my house, when night came on : as soon
as I came to town, I gave information to a
magistrate; and the prisoner was appre-
hended the same evening, about eleven o'clock
at my house." Here, gentlemen, is a very
clear and distinct account of many of the
material parts of this transaction ; it confirms
the account given by the former witnesses of
the prisoner's being at Montreal in October
last, and is direct and positive with regard to
his intentions on his last comin{;-in; and,
coupled with the testimony of Frichette, in
those parts where he confirms it, amounts to
a full proof of the overt-acts mentioned just
now, and also of the 18th, which charges the
prisoner with having assumed the name of
Felt, for the purposes therein assigned : an<l
in this particular, he is farther confirmed by
the eviaence of Mr. Ryland, who is the last
witness called, who says,— '^ Between 1 1 and
IS o'clock at ni^ht, on the 10th of May, I
received a deposition made by tbe last wit-
ness, containing in substance the evidence
which he has just given, from which I learnt
that Maclane was in Quebec. I commum*
cated it to the covemor, and, by his order»
went with a snuul party of soldiers, to appre-
hend him. 1 found him in bed at Mr. Black'a
house, in the suburbs: I awoke him, and
asked him what his name was ; he said Felt;
I told him I understood it was Maclane ; be
a£ain asserted, that his name was Felt, and
that I was mistaken. I wished to give him a
receipt for the monies he had with him, and
asked him in what name; he answered Jacob
Felt ; I save him a receipt for monies found
on Jacob Felt, alias Davki Maclane." On
being cross-examined, he says, that the con-
duct of the prisoner waa periecUjr decent and
coUectedy not like a man conscioui of an/
crime*

809]

J^ High TretuoH.

A. D. 1767.

[810

This, eentlemen, is the whole of ths evi*
dence; for, on the pert of the prisoner, they
have called no witnesses. --^The prisoner (not
verv judiciously, I fear) has undertaken to
make his own defence: that defence you have
heard, in which he admits a numlierofthe
leading facts alleged against him by the wit-
nesses; but attempts to put a different colour
upon some, and to explain away others. You
have likewise heard his counsel, who have
availed themselves of all the veiy slender to-
pics the nature of the case aflforded in the pri*
soner^s behalf. You have likewise heard the
very able and satisfactory reply, nuule by the
attomey*ffeneral, to the defence that has been
set up, who, by a few very natural, but co-
gent questions, has shown how little these
transactions partake of a mercantile nature.
But, jgentlemen, you will please to recollect
that It is not from the speeches you hear, but
According to the evidence you hear, that you
are sworn to deliver your verdict. That evi-
dence I have repeated to you as fully as I am
able ; and it appears to me, that by far the
greater part of the overt acts charged have
Seen fully proved according to the statute. 1
will not undertake to ascertain in this cursoiy
manner, the precise number, because, in so
serious a matter, I shouM be sorry to haxard
any thing in which I am not perfectly found-
ed. The fifth and sixth overt acts are clearly
proved, because, vou may recollect, that (ex-
cepting the last), every witness produced,
whether subject or alien, swore to a personal
solicitation of them by the prisoner, to assist
in the invasion. Now the substance of the
fifth overt act is, that he solicited divers of
the king's subjects : and the sixth, that he so-
licited mvers persons not being subjects : But-
terfield and Cnandonet are of tnb description ;
and the four others are subjects. The ninth,
tenth, and eleventh overt acts, are proved by
Barnaid,' Cashing and Butterfield. The two
former prove the ninth and tenth ; they men-
tion the prisoner's departure from Montreal,
and Butterfield swears that the prisoner told
him he was going to Philadelphia to make his
returns to Adet This intercourse with Adet,
which is sworn to by several, namely Gush-
ing, who also speaks of the certificate in the
shoe, together with Butterfield and Black, is
the substance of the thud overt act, that he
conspired with the king's enemies to excite a
rebellioiiin the province. The thirteenth and
fourteenth overt acts, that he conspired to
surprise the walled and garrisoned city of
Quebec, are proved by Frichette and Black :
who also prove his assuming i!tm sache of Felt|
the twelflh overt act, in which they are con-
firmed by Mr. R^bnd. The taking the name
of Felt is not in itself criminal, unless it be
for the purpose charged in the indictment, in
which ^case it is certainly an overt act. The
savcoth overt act^ which charges him with en-
listing several persons is, 1 bdieve, ooW prov-
ed by^utterfitld, knd the eighth, that becon-
epired with etheis to introduce arms and am*

munition is, I think, only sworn to by Chan-
donet. This is precisely the case that vnM
foreseen by the statute of William, namely,
where one witness speaks to one overt act,
and another witness to another overt act of
the same kind of treason. So that, if there
were noother evidence in the present case, but
that of Butterfield and Chandonet, confined
to these two acts, it would rest with you to
consider of their evidence, and if you believed
them, such testimony would alone be suf^ci-
ent to support a conviction under the statute.
But by the evidence that has been had before
you, vou are not reduced to these straits.
Should you believe the witnesses that have
been produced, and no attempt has been made
to impeach their credit (on the contrary, ther
prisoner, with a becommg spirit of candonr,
admits, for aujght he knows, they may be all
honest men), it is my dutv to tell you, they
have provea sufficient, and more than suffici-
ent to maintain the indictment Sorr^ am I
to say, that nothing in the shape of evidence,
has been offered in behalf of the prisoner, or
I should have studiously given it all the
weight to which it might w fairly entitled.
An objection was taken that some of the wit-
nesses were still in custodjf as accomplices ; I
have already given an opinion on that head,
and marked what degree of credit ought to be

given to the dismceful evidence of Frichette ;
ut, admitting the objection to have that force
which it has not, how is the testimony of the
other five disinterested persons, whose charac*
ters are beyond reproach, to be disposed of P
I believe it will rarely be found, in state pro-
secutions for treasons of this sort, that out of
seven witnesses five are not in the most dis-
tant manner implKated in the transaction.
From the state otthe evidence as it lies before
you, gentlemen, you have no counter-balance
to examine, for it is all in one scale. The
whole must turn upon that degree of credit t»
which you think the witnesses, some of whom
are known to you, are entitled. A consider-
able period of time, and variety of circum^
stances are contained in the scope of their
evidence. If it could be supposed thatanj
sinister design were intendea against the pn«
soner, this would be the worst way of con-
ductine it ; as .by the breach of a material
link, when every connecting part is subieet t»
proof, the chain might fall to the gtound. On
the other hand, it must be more satisfactory
to you, gentlemen, who have your consciences
to deliver, should you find the charge made
out by the uniform and consistent testimony
of different persons, in different places, and at
different penods, than if it were a single fact,
to be proved atone time and place; for to
those accustomed to the investigation of
crimes, the former sort of proof, as it is most
difficult to be made out, has always appeared
the most convincing.

Havine thus endeavoured, gentlemen, to
explain tne law in this case, and having re-
peated the evidence, it remains for yon to de-

'

Bll]

S7 GEORGE IH.

^OaM Mtdani

[812

leniriDe Upon UnC evidence j fori the ietdkt
must be yonra. If you have any reasonable
sround of doubt, I need not observe to yoo
{hat it is the invsriable direction of an &^
fish court of ittstice to lean to the side of mer*
cy. If you disbelieve the evidence in all its
IMUts you cannot convict the prisoner : on the
other hand, if you believe the witnesses, and
that the treasons charged aniDSt hiniy or
either of them, have been deanyand satisfao->
tortiv proved, you will find him guilty : the
whole is left to you to determine this issue
according to your oath.

[Then an officer was sWora to keep the Jury,
who withdrew for a1x>ut twenty minuted,
and then returned.]

Cierk <f tht ilnwjgiis.— Gentlemen of the
' Jury; answer to your names.

John Blackwood, &c. &c.

CUrk of ike Armigns. — Gentlemeny are yon
all agreed apon yoor veidictf

Jtrry.— Yes.

Oerk ff the Arraign$.^VfhQ shall speak

fiMTVOU?

Jufy.'--OnT Foreman.

Clerk ff ike Arraignt,^IHwid Madane,
hold up your hand [whkh he did]. Look
Upon the prisoner: How say yon— Is he
Guilty of the felony and hi|^ treason whereof
he stands indicted, or Not Oaihy t

Cierk of ike .lmi%iM.-- What goods or
chattels, lands or tencnients, had he at the
thne of the felony and hi^ treason by Uhm
committed, or at any time since ?

Ibmiaft.— None to our knowledge.

Oletk of tke Arraigfu-^Tbtn hearken to
your verdict as tftie Court hath recorded it—
You say, that David Madane is Guilty of the
iUeav and high treason whereof he^tandsin-
dicted; but that he had no goods or chattels,
lands or tenements at the time of the felony
and high treason by him cooHnitted, or at
ai^ time since to your knowiadgey nnd so you

J»y— Yeaj wodo.

CUrk of ike itrr«igii«.— Genilemrn of the
Jury, the Court discharges you, and thanks
you for your asrvice.

Mr. Jllome^ Geiiirai.— Upon the verdict
at recorded, I numbly move for judgment of
death andnst the prisoner.

Mr.i>*e.--Thi8 is uneipected. We hope
theConrt will aUow us the four days which
an usual, to move in arrest of judgment.

Mr. Jiiortujf Geaeroi.— In cases at bar,
fimr davs ate usmdly aUowed; but in cases*
decidaa before justices ofQyer and Terminer
IliB pmctioe has been difiereiit Inthain-
tlanees of sir John iVeind,* of Chamock,t of
Lawick,$ and very recently of De La Motte,§

* See the case, anti^ vol. IS, p. 94.
t AmUpYol. 19,p. 14A5.

4«U

{

^aa,v«l.lS,i^M7.
Jmlyvol. tl^pw614.

I

all tried under commissions of Gyer andTer*
miner, judgment was given natamier. If tbi6
gentiemen have any thing to move in arrest
of judgment, they nave now the opportunity.
I am ready to anfiiwer them.

CAi^/asfice.— The practice certainly nas
the attorney-general has stated it. He moves
for judgment, and we are bound to pronounce
it, if nothing to arrest it is offered by the pri*
soner.

Cierk ofihe Arroigm. — ^David Maclane yon
stand convicted of felony and high tieaMin, in
compassing the death of the king, uid in ad-
hering to his enemiefr— *what have you to say,
why the Court should not give judgment
against yon to die according to law.

Prtf0fier.^-My counsel will state what I
have now to ofier.

Mr. Fyfte.-^Majr it please your Honours;
We have two poinis to move in arrest of
judgment, and numbly hope, that time will
be Slowed us for that purpose.

C^M^JaiefM.— What are they? is the at-
torney general apprised of them ?

Mr. PyJite— The first is, that the statute on
which tlie indictment is framed is a local stn>
tute, and not in force in tbb province; the
second, that the indictment noes not state
the firisoner to be a sidgect of our lord the
king. The grounds have been mentioned to
the attorn^ general.

Ckirf Jueiiee^li lesU then with the
attorney-general. You have had time suffi-
cient to prepare yourselves; but that may
not be the ease with the attorney-general : —
If he IS ready to oppose the motami, the Court
are ready to fanur it, otherwise it may stand
over till Mond^ next.

AUormey General. — ^The points have been
mentioned to me, I am ready to go npon the
motion imtnediately.

CkiefJtaiiee.r^ThMB so on*
,.Mr. PvAce.— Blay it ]Mease your Honours;
We beg leave to move in arrest of iudgment
upon two gvounds; first, because toe statute
or g5th Edward 3rd, upon which tliis indict*
raent is grounded^ is a local statnla. confined
to the realm of England, being made for the
sole and espress purpose of protaeting the
person of his migesty and bis govenunent at
noma, and does not extend to his.mi^t^*B
oe&onies^ or any of his fdreign dominions^
for, the words of the statute are, * when a
man doih compass or imagine the death of
our lord the king. If a man beadhetent to
the king^s enemies in ike reelm^ giving to
them aid and comfort in ike rcafw or else-
whew. IfanumdolevywaragaiBBtourkMd
the king in km reaimJ' By all which it eleariy
appears, ftom the express words of the statute,
that it is confined to the realm of England t
now by the realm of Bnglaod is meant that
part of Great Briuin called England, and
therefore this statute cannot be considered
as in force in Canada.

The SBOsnd ground is, because it is not
statad in tko iadiotment that the prilotaer

UlS] J^ot Hi^ Tteason.

waaaiu^fectofourlordthekmgp Thisyinay
it please your hgnours, I conceive to be an es-
MDtial part of an indictinent for high trea-
son ; indeed, I conuder it as its basis, with^
out wbich it cannot stand ; lor it is a clear
]¥Hnt tbat none but ^nlyects owe allegiance,
and consequently, none but subjects can be
ffiulty of the crime of high treason, and there-
tore, unless we state the person accused, to be
a sul^ect, in the indictment, we cannot con-
clude contra ligeatUim $h4b dthitumy because we
have not first shown that he owed that allegi-
ance ; and this I conceive, is the reason why,
in the case of De La Motte, who was a
foreigner, the indictment stated him to be a
subject of our lord the kin^. I therefore
humbly submit these two objections to the
consideration of your honours, and tnist you
will find them ^ood and valid.

Mr. Franckluu — ^May it please ^ourHo-
Boars; 1 rise to support the motion m arrest
of Judpnent, ana I think the grounds on
which It is made, are sufficient, and will so
appear to the Court. The first objection goes
to destroy the base work of the whole pro-
ceedings ; but should that not be found valid,
we will then rest upon the second, which at-
tacks what we conceive tabe a fii>tal informa-
lity in the indictment This is, I believe, the
first instance, where a question respecting tbe
law which ought to govern the present case,
has been raised in order to make an object
of legal discussion and decision in an English
cottrt of law in America ; but though it has so
happened, that no convictions &ve before
taken place on the sUtute of the «5th Ed-
ward 3rd, cap. tnd, the prisoner's counsel
have not been the fint to support the idea,
that this statute does not extend to the pro-
vince ; it is a subject, which has been already
canvassed extrajudicially, and o|)inions have
been given upon it. If tb^re is room for
doubt, that is a sufficient reason wliy the
question should now be determined by the
Court, that the important law of high treason
may be clearly settled. Our objection is,
thai the statute of the 95th Edward 3rd was
local, operating in the realm of England only,
and intended to punish ofiences of treason
triable within tbe kingdoms, and that it was
not therefore comprehended in the ele\'enth
clause of the act of the 14th year of his pre-
sent niajesty*s reign, cap. 83, commonly
called the Quebec act, which introduced the
criminal law of England into this province.
The words of the statute of Edward Srd, es-
pecially refer to the realm of England, and it
ktfng once, in Maurice Howard's case, made
a question whetiier Ireland was to be consi-
dered as part of the realm of England,, it was
ruled that it did not fonn part of it. To have
made the statute part of the criminal law of
this province, I humbly contend the provin-
cial legi«»lature ought to have re-enacted it,as
was done in Ireland by their parliament, and
our courts should |iot have been left to con-
aider by fiction f the province of Lower Canada^

A» B. 1797.

[814

as the realm of England in relation V»
ofiences committed within the province. It
is a matter of that importance that demands
the interference of our lezialature. I sub^
mit the point with all due deference to
the Court. I come now to the second ground
of the motion in arrest of judgment, namely,
the prisoner is not averred to be a sul^ect
of the king, which, I apprehend, waa
essentially necessary io make the indictment
a good one. Persons living under the proleo-
^tion of our government, may be considered as
falling under two descriptions, natunU born
and temporary subjects, both owing allegi-
ance; hut, the former a permanent allegi-
ance, which he can never shake off. If the
prisoner owed no allegiance during the time
he remained in the province, certainly he
would not have been called here to answer
for the offirnce of which he has been con-
victed ; but it was in consequence of his beiog
a temporary subject, that allegiance was due
from him, and the indictment should have
averred him to be a subject of the king. In
support of this doctrine I can appeal to the
precedentsof Francia'sand De la Blotters eases,
who were both aliens, but notwithstanding
alleged to be subjects, in which light doubli-
less, they were considered 9JKKMf their ren-
dencc.and the protection afibrdod them by
the kioff's government under wbich they
lived. In Francia*s case, this notion was
even carried too fiir; for, the indictment
charged him with compassing the death of
his natural lord the king, but his counsel took
an eiceptioo, and I admit it was a valid one,
for the allegation was contrary to fact, and all
the writers say, these words will vitiate an
indictment against an alien. Oqr excep-
tion is different from that which was made in
the case last cited; but I think equally
strong, for the indictment does not, on tkns
face of it, show wh^r the prisoner owed that
allegiance, for the violation of which a ver-
dict has been given against him. The coun-
sel for the prosecution cannot then obtain a
judgment against the prisoner, when they
have lio law to ground their proceedings upon;
or, admitting thev have, there is a fatal omis-
sion in their indictment. I humbly submit
our motion rn arrest of judgment to the Court,
and am fully confident, that the arguments
we have offered in support of it, will receive
all tbe consideration they merit in favour of
life.

Mr. Attorney General.^M«j it please your
Honours ; The grounds on which this rootioiv
in arrest of judgment is made, are these.
That we have no law on which our indict-
ment can be founded, and that not having
averred the prisoner to be a subject of bis
majesty, at tbe time of the offence com lilted,
the indictment itself, is essentially defective.
The first of these objections appears to me
very desperate ; and were it not solemnly put
in a case of life, I should not conceive it re-
quired an answer ; but as it is, I am held to

815] 37 GEORGE III.

offer to the consideration of the Court some
arguments^ which, I tnist, will be satisfactory,
from a conviction ia my own mind, that they
are well founded.

This is cerUinly the first trial for high
treason, which has taken place in Canada,
perhaps in America, if we eicept the shame*
Jul proceedings had in the year 1701, against
colonel Nicholas Bayard* in the late province
tofNew York; and even this is not a case
similar to the present, as his indictment was
'drawn upon a local statute. I cannot, there-
fore, have recourse to precedents, but must
argue from general urinciples.

The prisoner is chargea with high treason,
t)f two descriptions ; compassing the king's
death, and adnering to his enemies, both evi-
dently taken from the English statute 95 Ed-
ward Srd, c. S, which is certainly the base of
the indictment ; for, unless it is supported by
this statute, I do not hesitate to admit that it
cannot be supported at all. But while I make
this admission, I must observe, that I believe
this to be the first instance of any doubts, pub-
lic or private respecting the law of treason in
Canada. The statute has uniformly been
thought the law of the land. The total silence
of our own provincial legislature upon the
aulyect is a strong proof of the public opi-
nion ; for, it is scarcely to be supposed that,
while we have enacted laws for the punish-
ment of the lesser offences which are injurious
to society, we should leave the great crime of
hieb treason totally unthought of, and permit
individuals to effect the very dissolution of so-
ciety unpunished. I argue that the silence of
the legislature can only proceed from a con-
irictioo, that the statute in question is un-
doubtedly in force, and sufficient for the pro-
tection of the government. Perhaps even mv
learned friends, to whom I am opposcdf,
mieht, under other circumstances, comcide
with me; but this is not now to be asked—
and whatever may be the decision, they have
done right in proposing the question. It is
their duty to serve the prisoner to the utmost
limits of his case, and they promote the pub-
lic interest, by calling for a solenm decision
upon the law of treason, which, above ail
others, ought to be clearly settled.

If I rightly comprehend them, they say,
that the statute of Edward Srd, is a local sta-
tute, confined in its operation to treasons
committed witbin the realm of England ; and
therefore, admitting that the statute is intro-
duced into this country, yet it has no effective
operation ; for, Canada is not a part of the
realm of England. Now, to support this in-
ference, it is necessary for them to prove
that treasons, committed out of the realm of
England, are not offences under this statute ;
for if they do not, and on the contrary such
treasons can be shown to be offences within
the pale of this statute,.it is evident that it is
not a local statute, confined in its operation

•Sec the case of Bayard, a?ui, vol. IJ, p. 471.

Trial of David Mdclane

[816

to treasons committed within the realm of
England ; but with res|)ect to treasons com-
mitted without the realm, as the current of
authorities is directly against them, they
are totally silent, nor have they made
any attempt to show, that by the decision of
any Court in England, the limited construe^
tion for which they contend, has ever beeft
put upon the statute. Certainly nothing that
can support their argument is to be found
upon the first branch (compassing the death
or the king), the statute contains no restric-
tion whatever: the words- are these: ** When
a man doth compass or ima{:ine the death
of the king, or of our lady his queen, or' of
their eldest son and heir, be is guilty of
treason''— where are the expressions limit-
ing the operatbn of this clause in any re-
spect ? Words cannot be more general ; they
comprehend all acts of treason wherever com-
mitted. The decision of Crohagan's case h
an authority db^ectly to this point, and goes
to prove the established maxim, that treason
is not confined to time or place as all other
crimes are; for Crohagan's declaration, that
he would kill the king, was made at Lisbon^.
It is true, he afterwards came to England^
but it was in prosecution of his original in-
tention declared at Lisbon, which in fact was
the treason for which he suffered. This first
clause of the statute made no alteration in
the law of England, it is merelv declaratory
of what had been the common law for cen-
turies before;* and my lord Bacon, in bis
argument upon the case of the Postnati, says,
'* It js plain that if a subject of England had
conspired the death of the king in forreign
parts, it was by the common law of England
treason." I shall not trouble your honours
with any farther observations on this clause of
the statute. 1 cannot oonceivethat any great
expectations of success have been formed
upon it. The other clause on which the se-
cond count of the indictment is drawn, is in
these words : " If a man be adherent to the
king's enemies, in his realm, giving them aid
or comfort in the realm, or elsewhere, he is
guilty of treason."* From the obvious mean-
ing of these words, to give aid or comfort to
the king's enemies, in any part of the world,
is treason ; for otherwise the word ** e/te-
where'' has no import whatever. The cases
put by my lord Hale clearly show, that the
construction of this clause is not confined to
acts of adherence committed within the
realm, but generally extends to all acts of
adherence wnerever committed. **< If," says
he, '* there be a war between the king of
England and France, and then a temporary
peace is made, and within the time of that
truce an Englishman goes into France and
stays there, and returns before the truce ex-
pired, this is not an adherence to the enemy
within the statute:*' but he adds from the

* Vide Eden's Principles of Penal Law^
119.

817]

Jot H^h Treqson*

A. U. 1797.

£818

MthorHy of the fecord from which he draws
this opinion, that if the EnsHshman, during
his stay in France, had confederated or con-
spired with the enemy, or assisted them, to-
wards farther hostilities, that it would have
been an adherence. He puts a second case :
** If an Englishman,'' says he, " during
a war between the king of England and
Trance, be taken by the French, and there
swears fealty to the king of France, if it be
done voluntarily, it is an adherence/' In
both these cases the act which constitutes the
treason is committed without the realm, vet
both are put as instances of treason within
the statute. Were^ it necessary to adduce
farther authorities, the statute 35th of Henry
8th, cap. 2, might be cited. This act was made
for the trial oi treasons committed out of the
king's dominions. ** And in it,'' says my
lord Bacon, after, puttins the case of con-
sipirine the death of the king abroad, ** you
shall nud no words at all of making any new
case of treason which was not treason before;
but only of ordaining a form of trial." Erfio^
" it was treason before." I might also refer
to the statute 17 Geo. 3, c. 9, which was made
for securing persons charzed with the crime
of high treason committed in America^ Dp 1 1
shall not, for, I conceive, I have already fuUy
established that the statute of Edward 3rd, is
not a local statute confined to treasons com-
mitted within the realm of England : if it was
so, I do not, I must confess, see the weight
of the objection which has been made on this
supposition; but as this objection is not
founded in feet, it certainly requires no far-
ther answer. It only remains for me to prove
on this point, that the statute of Edward 3rd,
forms a part of the law of Canada, and con-
sequently, that the indictment is well sup-
ported by it. It is a general principle that
the criminal law of the conqueror imniediately
takes place in all conquered countries. This,
of itself, would be a sufficient proof that the
statute is part of the laws ot Canada; for,
Canada being a conquered country, and the
statute part of the criminal law of the con-
queror, the conclusion is necessary and ob-
^*®"*- , ?"*> we have a complete answer to
every thing which can be urged on this pomt
in the words of the Quebec act, 14 Geo. 3,
cap. 83. The eleventh clause of this act is
in these words; *♦ And whereas the certainty
and lenity of the criminal law of England,
.and the benefits and advantages resulting
from the use of it, have been sensibly felt
by the- inhabitants from an experience of
niore than nine vears, during which it has
been uniformly administered : be it therefore
enacted, that the same shall continue to be
administered, and shall be observed as law in
the province of Quebec, as well in the de-
acription and quality of the offence, as in the
method of prosecuUon and trial, and the
punishments and forfeitures thereby infiict-
•^•*'^It is h^dly possible to conceive words
of greater latitude. Whatcrer is an offence
VOL. XXVI,

by the criminal law of England, becomes, by
the operation of this statute, an offence by
the criminal law of Canada ; and if, by the
laws of England, it is high treason to compass
the death of the king, or to adhere to his
enemies, whether the compassing or adhe-
rence be within the realm of England or
without, the same offence, as well in the de-
scription as in the quality, is high treason in
Canada.

I shall not presume to trouble the Court'
any farther upon this part of the motion in
arrest of judgment. It is one of those point's
which require only to be fairly stated to pro-
duce conviction. The other objection is, that
the indictment is defective, because it does
not contain an averment that the prisoner at
the time of th6 high treason by him com-
mitted, was one of bis majesty*s subjects. I
certainly expected that soOie authorities
would have been produced, to show that the
words *' a subject of our lord the king" are
esbential in indictments for treason. It is
nut usual on these occasions to throw the
burthen of justification upon the officers of
the crown, without producing some ground
more solid than the opinion ot the prisoner's
counsel, which must of necessity be whatever
promises the greatest advantage to their
client — I looked for something more, and
finding they are silent, I feel convinced tliat
nothing can be produced ; for, I am too weli
acquainted with the industry of the gentle-
men concerned for the prisoner,^ to suppose
that the fultest researches have not been
made. They have indeed said, that the in*
dictment against Francis Henry De la Motte
contained an averment that he was a subject.
This I readily grant, but it is no authority to
prove, that these words were essential. In-
dictments in general contain much surplusage.
Neither is it a case in point; for, it was not
proved, nor was any attempt made upon the
trial to prove that he was an alien. De la
Motte, when judgment was given, stood be-
fore the Court as a British subject ; for, as
the contrary was not proved, the judges were
boiuid to presume him such : and therefore
there was not room for the question, whether
the averment was right or wrong ; and it was
in fact perfectly consistent with the case as it
then stood. The present question is plainly
this, — whether, on the face of the indict-
ment there is sufficient to warrant a judg-
ment against the prisoner for high treason ;
for, if there is, the averment, " that he is a
subject," is clearly superfluous. It may be as
well to insert it where the truth of the case
wiU permit it; but I have not a doubt upon
the subject in the present instance ; this being
clearly the case of an alien, for which reason
it was intentionally omitted, and by this
omission we have saved an argument, which
the gentlemen would otherwise have held, to
convince vour honours of the absurdity of
averring an alien t^ be a British subject. As
the case admitted of discussion^ whether the

3 G

819] STGEOHKETin.

ftveitnent was inserted ot onutled, it was
thought the safer course to leave it out» be-
cause the indictment contained sufficient to
warrant the judgment without it. This is
what I shall endeavour to establish; tiut be-
fore I proceed to remaiic on the several alle-
gations of the indictment, the Court will per-
mit me to observe and to produce some aulho-
Hties to prove that the averment, '* that the
party is a subject," is an innovation upon the
old form of indictments for high treason, and
by whom ibis innovation has been intro-
duced, or why it has been latterly adopted I
cannot discover.

The course of ancient precedents ran in
fhese words : " Ut falsus proditor contra na-
turalem Dominum suum.'* This is evident
from their inspection. I shall here cite a few,
which are those of the king aeainst Ayliffe,*
against Horsley,t aeainst Hayes,^ against
lord Delamere,§ and against Hampden;^)
and to these I add the first count of lord Pres-
ton's indictment,^ RosewelPs indictment,-**
and the indictments against Cranburne,
Lowick, Kookwoodft and Charnockl.t These
were all cases of subjects, and yet tne indict-
ments do not contain any positive averment
that they were subjects ; tney aver only that
tbc offences were committed by each of tlie

Sarties ^ Ut fiibus proditor contri naturalem
ominum suum.'^ Now the words '' natu-
ralem Dominum suum" in the case of an
alien, it has been lon^ since settled must be
omitted. My lord chief justice Holt in Cran-
bou^s ease, says expressly, ** No doubt it
would be a fault to have put in contri natu-
pttiem Dominum tuum where only a local alle-
giance is due.''§| This opinion is founded
upon a solemn decision in Hilary 86 Eliz.
when Stephano Ferrarade Gamaand Emanuel
Lewis Tinoco, two Portuguese by birth, came
into England under the queen's safe conduct,
and living there under her protection, joined
with Dr. Lopez in treason against her ma-
jesty. They were detected and brought to
trial ; and in their case it was resolved by
the judges, that their indictment ought to
begin <* That they intended treason contrd
Dominam Reginam^ omitting these words
naturalem Dominam tuam^ and ought to con-
clude, tofitri ligeantia tua debitum,**\\ii\ in the
present instance, knowing the prisoner to be
an alien ; this course ha^ been pursued. This
indictment avers that he committed the
offence as a false tr:.itor ^gainst his majesty,
contrary to the duty of his allegiance, which
is all that the case of De Gania requires : and

qflknii Mtdang

td^

• Trem. 9. f Trem. 4.
§ Ant^^ vol. 11, p. a04.
n Anti.ytX. 11, p. 487.
% Anti^ vol. 19, p. 646.
•♦ Aniiy vol. 10, p. 149.
ft- Anti, vol. 13, p. 139.
it Jfi/c, vol. 19, p» 1879,
§§ ^ftt^, vol. 13, p. S97.
ni) iiirfe, vol. 9, p. 6ir.

t Trem. 5.

we have the opinion of my lot^ chief justice
Holt explicitly declared in Cranbume's case*
that this is sufficient ; ** for if it Appear," says
that great lawyer,*' that he has committed an
offence aeainst the laws of the kingdom, and
against the duty of his allegiaiice, which 19
high treason that is enough.^ Ck>nformabIj
to these authorities and the opinion of sir
Michael Foster, to the same eSect,t in the
late cases (even of subjects), particularly that
of lord George Gordon,t and the veiy case of
De la Motte, which thev cite, the words naiu^
raUm i>om»mi]ii3 have been omitted. Since
this omission, for what reason I cannot
see, the averment, that the accused is a sttb«
ject, has been generally inserted. I sav ge-
nerally, because it has not always been done ;
for, in an indictment preferred against a natiK
ral born subject, William Stone,f in the
King's-bench in England, for high-treason,
in 1796, the second count does not contain
either the averment that he was a subject, or
the words naturalem Dominum nittm, and yet,
on that trial, on the part of the defendant, no
exception was taken to the ibrm of the indict-
ment; on the contrary it was expressly ad-
mitted that the indictment was sufficient.

I have shown that the words naturalem
Dominum must be omitted in the case of an
alien ; and it is certainly best to leave them
out in all cases. I proceed to show why it 19
not necessary to insert an averment that the
accused is a subject, and here I call upon my
learned friends, to producean authority, an opi-
nion, a Dictum, which dedares it necessary. I
do not mean to say that if insierted it will cer-
tainly vitiate : I contend only that an indict-
ment, in other respects Well drawn, is suffi-
cient without it. One Of the strongest reasons
in support' of ^his opinidn appears to itle to be
the general rule of the law, that evefry man
must, prima facie be presumed 'a subject.
This was stMed by sir Baitholomew Shower,
in Cranburne's case;|| and in the / case of
David Lindsay it was so #ukd by the Court.^
TheJatter is very strong ; ^he indictment was
founded on the statute of William and Mary,
by which it was made high treason for any of
the subjects of their majesties who went to
France, to return into England without the
royal licence. A motion was ittide after
verdict in arrest of judttknont, because the
indictment did not aver that he was a subject
when he roent to France, Blit the Court ob-
served, that this was not 'an objection which
could avail, because they were noutid to take
him to be a natural subject unless the contrary
appear, where is the necessity of avisrdng what
the Oourt most assume till the contrary appear?
Do we, in indidtments ft>r any offence aver

• Anti^ vol. Id, p. «dr.
t Fost. 186.
t Aati, vol. fll» p.'495.
§ ^ftf^,vol. 95,p, 1198.

II Jnf^, vol. 18, p. esr.

^ Anti, vol u, p. 1031^ Km.

mi

/or High Treason,

A. D. 1797.

[822

tlialat the time it was comimlto^ tlie accused
was of sane mind ? Assuredly we do not ;
and for the same reason the Court must pre-
sume ium to be of sane mind« till the con-
tfm is proved. There appears to be a strict
smalo^ between the instances of alienage
and insanitjr, in this particular and in other
points; for msanitv must be ])leaded or given
ih evidencey and tnis is undoubtedl^r the nile
with respect to alienage ; for it is a tact within
the knowledge of the accused, and the proof
4>f it lies upon him.

A subject is defined to be ^ a member of
the commonwealth.*' It ma^ be well doubted
whether an alien can possibly be brought
within this de6nition : certain it is, there is
^ide scope for argument to prove that he
cannot I contena therefore, that it is safer
to omit the assertion, and to support the in-
dictment by other averments, in this case
the indictment sets forth the offence itself
strictly according to precedents^ both ancient
and modera, and avers that it was committed
hj the prisooer, late of the parish of Quebec,
at the same parish of Quebec, a place within
the king's dominiona and within the jurisdic-
tion of the court, a6 a false traitor against his
m^jesty^ It further states that he wholly
withdrew the allegiance which he owed to
4>ur sovereign, and that the offence was com«
mitted by him traitorously against the form
of the statute and. against the duty of his al-
legiance. Surely this is enoueh, and particu-
larly at this stage of the trial ; for we must
recollect that this is a motion after verdict, and
I cai^iot but think, that very argument which
the counsel for the prisoner have adopted
proves, that the jury have even found the
feet for which they contend, I mean that the
prisoner was a subject of his majesty at the
time of the ^iffence committed, according to
the very construction which they wish to put
upon the vord *« subject." Their argument is
this ; ** unless he is a sulyect, he cannot owe
allegiance." If this be true, the converse
must be eoually true, that is, " If he owes
allegiance, be must be a subject:" now what
have the jury found? They have found that
he owed allegiance, for they have expressly
Ibund *' that he withdrew the allegiance which
he, of right, ought to have borne towards
our lord the king;" and they have also found
that his offence was committed contrary to the
duty of that alleeiance which he owea to his
miyesty. They have therefore found him to
be a subject ; and this reasoning is certainly
egpported by mihat was said ii^ Tucker's case,

Slord Raymond, p. 1); for allegiance is there
lefined to be the mutual bond between the
kiog apd his subjects, by which the subjects
owe duty to the king, and the king protection
to his subjects. << And treason/' said the
jildges, ^ is the breach and violation of that
duty of allegiance which the subject owes to
the king-" The Court wifill permit me to re-
Cesit that the breach and violation of that
outy of a^egjitiQpe^ which the pri9oner owed

to his majestvin this case, is expressly found ;
and in this alone the jury have found the of-
fence itself to be high treason, and the prisoner
a traitor. But it is not upon this only that the
case must rest, they have found more, they,
have found that the prisoner is of the parish
of Quebec^ that he committed his treason ia
that parish, that he has been guilty, traitor-
ousfy guilty, of the whole charge, and that the
offence which he committed is high treason
within the statute of Edward 3rd.

May it please your honours; I might
perhaps close the argument without fartner.
observation ; but one authority which I have
cited, has struck me so forcibly, that I request
to be indulged with your permission to repeat
it. The jury have found the crime of which
the prisoner is guilty to be high treason, and
an oWeucti which he has committed against
the laws of the province, and afunst the duty
of his allegiance. The words of my lord chief
justice UoTt, which I have already cited from
Cranbume's case, are these : " If it appear
that he has committed an offence against
the laws of the kingdom and against the
duty of his aJlegiance, which is high treason,
that is enougn.

Mr. Py^.T-May it please your honours ;
In reply to, what has fallen from my learned
friend, the attorney-general, in answer to \|^e
arguments usied in support of the motion in
arrest of judgment, I shall not take up much
of the time of the Court, knowing that the
objections which we have had the nonour to
offer, need only be fairly stated, and that the
Court will give them uiat serious considered
tion which they may deserve.

And I must still contend upoa the firs^
ground, that, from the plain and natural con-
struction of the words of the statute 36 Edward
Srd, it cannot be considered as extending to
Canada, so as to make any attempt lo subvert
the government of this country, high treasoa
under that statute.

Nor do I conceive that the Quebec act
has had the effect to inUoduce the S5th
of Edward 3rd into this countrv^ but I
humbly contend, that it was, and is, ne-
cessary to introduce it by a special act of
the provincial parliament. And notwith-
stonding all that has fallen from the attorney-
general, on the second ground of the mo-
uon in arrest of judgment, I am still of
opinion, that it was essentially necessary
that the indictment should have averred the
prisoner to have been a subject ; for there
are two descriptions of subjects, the one natural
born, and the other temporary; the prisoner
at the bar certainly comes under the second
class, and therefore, for the reasons which wt
have had the honour to state to the Court ir»
the opening of this motion, I humbly conceive
that the indictment not stating the prisoner
to be a subject, mustj^ on that account, be
considered defective.

The Honourable ?hief Justice Oigowfc.— If
I understand tbis naotion rightly, it ia made

S2S} 37 GEORGE IIL

.upon tiro gri^unds : the first that the statute
of treasons is a local statute, and does not
obtain in this prov nee ; and secondly, that
the indictment does not state the prisoner
to be a subject of our lord the king. With
regard to the 6rst ohjeclion, independently of
the principle which some intelligent writers
have advanced, that in conauercd countries
that are civilized, although tne laws respect-
ing property continue till varied by the con-
queror, v^t that the pleas of the crown or the
criminal laws do ipso facto immediately attach.
It is well known that, by an act of the British
legislature, the criminal law of England is
established in this province. The criminal
law of England, as the criminal law of most
coudlries, is general. Some statutes indeed
are restricted to the realm, others to particular
counties ; and there never was a aoubt, but
that all the general statutes, up to the 14th
of the king, are in force in this province.
The question then arises, are the clauses of
the 25th Edward Srd, upon which this indict-
ment is framed, penned in general terms?
The first clause is, '* If a man do compass or
imagine the death of our lord the king."
Words cannot be more general ; for, here is
no restriction or limitation, either of time or
place. The second is, ** if a man be adherent
to the king's enemies in his realm giving
them aid and comfort in the realm or else-
mhere/' This clause is studiously comprehen-
sive, and certainly takes in this province.
There can, therefore, be no question whether
general clauses are to be deemed local. This
IS sufficientlv aoparent upon general reason-
injg; but addea thereto, there are a number
of^cases in point, together with a parliamen-
tary decision on the question, wncther the
statute of treasons is or is not confiued to
£ngland f Cardinal Pole's case was a com-
passing in Italy; Dr. Storey's case, in the
jLow Countries ; Croha^n's, in Portugal, and
Bbenezcr Piatt's case in America. To sav
that a man cannot compass the king's death
in America, is to say that the operations of
the mind are suspended in America; and to
say that America is neither in the realm nor
elsewhere, is an absurdity. Two several
statutes, one in the 33rd, the other in the
35tb ;^ear of Henry ^th, mentions treasons
committed out of the realm of England; and
without the king*s dominions. There is clearly,
therefore, no reason to arrest judgment oo
the first ground.

With regard to the second objection, that
the indictment does not state the prisoner to
be a subject of our lord the king, it may ap-
pear to come with a very bad grace, aAer the
pains taken to prove him an alien. If it be
a necessary averment to state that the prisoner
is a subject, it must be necessanr either as 9
matter of fact, or as a matter of fiction. As
a matter of fact, it is contradicted by the evi-
dence; and if it were necessary as a matter
(of fiction, you would not be at liberty to dis-
prove ity for the reasons laid down by lord

Trial of David MadaM

[824 jL

Mansfield,^ in the caM of Fabii^ and
Mostyn. But in Francis's case, who was
an alien, he was stated in the indictmept
to be a subject, and evidence was allowed to
be given that he was bom at Bordeaux ii|
France ; and Mr. Hungerford, who was a very
able lawyer, se^ed to be perfectly satisfied
that he should be able to arrest the judg-
ment because that averment was made:
and to day it is to be arrested because it
was not made. lii many of the old en-
tries, as appears by the cases cited by^ Mr.
Attorney-general, this averment is omitted.
In modem precedents it has been inserted
upon the prinpiple, that while a person owes
allegiance, whether lasting or temporary, he
may be called a subject ; but in tne positive
and absolute sense of the term it is a false
fact, and according to Mr. Justice Foster the
safer way is to omit them. ^ The essence of
an indictment for treason is this, that the
crime committed is against the duty of the par-
ties aNegiance ; for, as lord Holt observes in
Cranburne'scase, '^ if the crime be not against
the duty of his allegiance^ it cannot be high
treason." The prisoner is charged in the in-
dictment with having acted against his alle-r
fiance — that allegiance which he owed as be-
ing ofthecity of Quebec, in this province, mer-
chant; for that is the addition m which he Is
designated in the indictment The temporary
and local allegiance to the supreme power, due
byevery sojourner, in every state, is a principle
of general law. The commorancy averred in
the indictment, is sufficient to show that he
owed an allegiance ; he is charged with hav-
ing acted against that allegiance generally,
without stating whether as sojourner or sub-
ject, the allegiance due being averred, the
Court is of opinion that it is not necessary to
make this indictment valid, that he should be
charged as a subject, and that, as there is no-
thing in either objection, the motion in ^rrest
of judgment ipust be over-ruled.

Clerk of the i4rrflign».— David Mac lAUe
hold up your hand you have been indicted of
felony and treason, have been arraigned and
pleaded thereto Not Guilty, and for your trial
have put yourself on God and the country,
which counUy have found you guiily- What
have you to say for yourself why *«« Court
should not proceed to give judgment of death
upon you according to law ?

Prwoner.— I have nothing more to say.

Clerk of the ilrrai^nf.— Cryer make procla-
mation. , -

Oyez! Oyez! Oyez! Thdr honours the
king's justices do strictly charge and command
all manner of persons to keep silence while
sentence of death is passing against the
prisoner at the bar, upon pain of imprisonment.

Chief Justice Ofgoorfe.— David Mac Lane ;
you have been indicted for the crime of high
treason, to which indictment you pleaded not
guilty, and for your trial put yourself on God
^■^■•^^•— ^■— ^— "■^^■'^■^^^^■■— "^■^■"— ■— ^■■■'^"^""'^"''^^^^^
• Amtlj vol. 90, pp. t^^f €tMi.

8251

for High Treason,

A. D. 1797.

[826

and the countiy, by which country you have
b^en found guilty. You have been tried by a
respectable and intelligent jury, nianyofwhom
have heretofore served on the grand inquest.
Your trial has been attended with such circum-
stances of fairness, openness and lenity, as do
not obtain in any country upon earth, except
where the laws of Endand prevail. More
than twenty days have elapsed since you were
acquainted with the particulars of the charge
brought against you, and of the names of the
witnesses to prove it, that you might not be
surprised by a sudden accusation, and might
have ^11 time to prepare your defence. After
the facts charged were fully established by
the verdict, your counsel have been heard on
every objection that could be brought to the
regularity of the proceedings ; whereas, had
you been accu3ed of the like crime, in that
country whose government you would wish
to impose on this province, instead of being
allowed a period of twenty days, you might
have been charged, convicted, and executed,
in les^ than so many minutes, reflect, therefore
whether you have not been guilty of a most
unjust attempt against this government.

It appears in evidence that you are an alien
to the king*s government, notwithstanding*
which you have been treated with the same
indulgence as though you had been a native
subject. True it is, that a treaty of amity
subsists between his majesty's subjects, and
the citizens of the United States, many of
whom have borne public testimony to the
kindly offices received from the king^s sub-
jects. It is an intercourse we wish to cherish
as well with public bodies as with individuals
and as it is qot probable that you personally
have received an injury from this colony, you
have been guilty ot an unprovoked attempt
against this government.

Having heard of some disturbances that
were excited on account of the Road act, you
falsely concluded that his majesty's Canadian
subjects were disaffected to government, and
ready to join in a rebellion, which you were
willing to conduct. You might have known
that it is easy to provoke murmurs on a like
occasion in the best regulated states: in Eng-
land similar discontents have taken place and
subsided as in this country ; for a short ex-
perience has convinced the people that the
measure was greatly for their benefit. Putting
conscience out of the question, as a prudent
roan, you had no grounds to go upon. No
one, therefore, but a rash and unprincipled
character would have engaged in so desperate
an enterprise ; and na one but a cruel and
mhttman character would have projected such
measures to carry it into execution. Consider
then, whether you have not been guilty of a
most atrocious and sanguinary attempt against
this government

Perhaps you may think these terms savour
*]?»pint of reproach; far from it: in your
pltiabl«»eondition,to betray such a temper were
▼ery tmwchrlhy. No ;— they arc uttered in

tha spirit of admonition, and that upon this
principle. You seem to possess a good un-
derstanding ; I wish, therefore, to fasten on
your mind the persua^on of this manifest
truth, which nothing but the most perverse
obstinacy can resist, namely, that though
yourdesigns were most hostile against this go-
vernment, yet you have experienced that &r
trial you would not have met with in aliy
other government under Heaven ; in hopes,
that when the mist of delusion shall have
disappeared, the conviction of one truth may
prepare your mind for the admission of others,
and finally produce that sense of contrition
and remorse, which can alone expiate your
dangerously wicked crimes. Had your trai-
torous project been carried into execiftion,
who is there in this numerous audience that
would not have felt the consequence among
his friends and relations, or in his own person.
But as it has pleased Providence to baffle your
pernicious designs, I shall press- this subject
no farther. This government which you
wfshed to overthrow, has, like all others pro-
vided for its security against those who seek
to destrov it. In the scrutiny of offences it
is more lenient than others, but is equally
^vere in the punishment. That punishment
yuu have justly incurred, and it would be
highly uncharitable to beguile you with the
expectation that it will not oe inflicted. Let
me, therefore, most seriously exhort you to
employ the short time you have to live, in
submitting yourself with humiliation and re-
pentance to the Supreme Ruler of all things,
whose goodness is equal - to his power, and
who^ though you suffer here, may admit you
to his everlasting mercy hereafter. That such
mercy may be your portion^ is my most ear-
nest prayer.

It remains that I should discharge the*pain-
fulduty of pronouncing the sentence of the
law, which is, ** That you, David Mac Lane,
be taken to the place from whence you came,
and from thence you are to be drawn to the
place of excution, where you must be hanged
oy the neck, but not till you are dead ; for,
you must be cut down alive and your bowels
taken out and burnt before your face ; then
your head mtist be severed from your body,
which must be divided iuto four parts, and
your head and quarters be at the king's dis-
posal; and the Lord have mercy on your
soul."

The Attorney General moved, th&t a day
should be fixed for the execution ; — and the
Court appointed Friday the 21st day of July
instant.

»

This important trial commenced at seven
o'clock in the morning, waai concluded at nirns
in the evenine^ and was attended by the most
numerous aMdicnce ever assembled in Que-
bec.

On Friday, the 21st of July, the prisoner,
David Mac Lane, pursuant to bis sentence.

897] 37 GEORGE UI. Trial qfA. Duncan, NeU Rmdpaih, and [8SS

was takea fimn the coamxm gpQland placed
upon a hurdle, which moved in slow solem-
nity towards the place of execution, attended
hy the sheriff and peace officers of the dis-
tncty a military guard of fifty men and a great
multitude of spectators. About a quarter
after ten the hurdle drew up close to the gal-
lows erected upon the GUtcu without the
garrison ^1. As soon as it stopt, Maclane
rose up, he was dressed in white linen grave
deaths, and wore a white can on his head.
The reverend Mr. Mountain ana the reverend
Mr. Sparks attended him, and with them he
continued in fervent prayer for some minutes.
He then informed the executioner that he was
ready, and was by him directed to ascend the
ladder which he immediately did. — But the
executioner observing that lie was too high,
he descended a step or two, and then addies-
sedthe spectators in the following words,
'' this place eives me pleasure; I am now
going where I have long wished to be, and
jrou^ wha now see me, must all follow me
u a short time, some of ^ou perhaps in a few
^ys ; let this be a warning to vou to prepare
for your own deaths/' Then addres^ng himr

self to themilitsrjr who weredmwnup in a hol-
low square about the gallows, he addedf' you,
with arms in your hands, you are not secure
here^ even with your arms, I am going where
I shall be secure without them.''

He immediately drew the cap over his &ce
exclaiming ** Oh God receive my soul ! I long
to be with my Jesus'' and dropped his baoc^
kerchief as a signal for the executioner, who
instantly turned him off. — ^He appeared to
struggle with death but a short time.

The body hung for five and twenty minutes
and was then cut down. A platform, with a
raised block upon it, wasbroueht near the
gallows, and a fire was kindledTor executing
the remainder of the sentence. The head
was cut off, and the executioner holding it up.
to public view proclaimed it " the head of a
traitor.'* — An incision was made below the
breast and a part of the bowels taken out and
burnt; the four quarters were marked with %
knife, but were not divided from the body.

The whole of the execution took up about
two hours, and the conduct of tlie unhappy
sufferer was in every respect composed and
becoming hb situation.

628. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh
against Alison Duncan, Neil Reidpath, and Robert
Mitch EXL, on an Indictment charging them with Mobbing
and Rioting in resistance of the execution of the Militia Act«
11th and 12th of October: 37 George III. a. d. 1797-

Cum Juslidaria S. D. N. Regis lenta in
Nofa SessioDia Domo de Edmburg^y un-
dBouno die Octohsis miUesime sepUngen*
tesimo et nonogesimaseptinioy per hono-
vabiks yiios Robertum Mac Quoen de
Braafield, Oominuaa JusUciaiium Cle-
Hcum, Joannem Swistoa dc Swinton,
Dominom Gulielmuas Naime de Dun-
sinoaoy Baronetum, el Davidem Smjrth
de McthvenL Dominos CooMsiisionaiios
JusUdarie didi S. D. N. Begia.

Curia legitime affinnata.
Intran^

Elkabtih or Elfy Dnneany servant, or late
senrant to Jotm Davidem, eoUkr, In Elphing-
stone. ■ "

Neil Reidpath, senrant, or late serf ant to
George Dickson, tenant in Lampockwells,
m tha county of Ha^dingtoa, and

B4fben MU(Ml^ servant or late serraot
to Andrew Blair, cornrdeakr. in TraMot.
rands.

Indicted and accused at the instance of
Roliert Dundas, eaqub e^ of AoMston, bia ma-
4«syr's.advQ«ate fv hiaiasaestjf's interest for

the crimes of mobbing, riot, and others in man-
ner mentioned in the criminal Ubel raised
thereanenit, bearing

That whereas by the laws of this and of
every other well-governed realm, mobbing and
rioting, more especially with the intent and
purpose of re&istmg and opposing the execu*
tion of a public law, and wnen accompanied
with circumstances of great vblence and out-
rage, are crimes of an heinous nature and
severely punishable : Yet true it is and of
verity, that the said David Duncan, Elizabeth,
or EUy Duncan, John Nicolson, Francis Wil-
son, Eobert Mitchell, and Neil Reidpath,are
all and each or one or other of them, guilty
actors, or art and part of the aforesaid crime
or crimes, in so far as on the twenty- ninth day
of August one thousand seven hundred and
ninety-seven, or on one or other of the days
of that n¥>ntL or of the month of July immei^
diately preceding, or of September munedi-
ately folbwine, David Anderson, esq. of Saint
Germains, John Cadell, esq. of CQckenzie»
M^jor Andrew Wight of Ormiston, and An*
drew Gray. esq. of Southfieldyall 4eputy lieu*
tenants of the said county of Haiddio£^n»
having mf9t in the bouse of Johu Qton^iAa*

839]

MUcMlJor MMmgrnid moing. A. D. 170^

[890

keeper^ in the village of Tranenty parish of
Tranent, and county of Haddington aforessdd,
in order to carry into execution an act of the
thirty-seventh of George the third, cap. 103,
intituled *^ An Act to raise and embody a
Militia Force in that part of the Kingdom of
Great Britain called Scotland/' by receiving
the lists from the different parishes of those
liable to serve in the militia, and adjusting and
amending the same in terms of the saia sta-
tute : a number of riotous and disorderly per-
sons, among whom were the said David ENin-
can, Elizabeth or £lly Duncan, John Nicol-
son^ Francis Wilson, Robert Mitchdl, and
Neil Reidpath above complained on, or one
or other of them, armed with great sticks,
bludgeons and other offensive weapons, and
assembled on the streets of the said village of
Tranent: And while the before-named per-
sons, deputy lieutenants of the said county of
Haddington, were proceeding in discharge of
their duty, and in terms of the said statute,
to car^ the same into effect, the sikid riotous
and disorderly persons, among Whom were
the afore-named persons above complained
on, or one or other of them, did thereupon
beset the house of the said John Glen, where
the sud deputy lieutenants were so met, and
did in the most riotous and outrageous man-
ner, assault the said house with stones, by
breaking the windows, and attempting for-
cibly to enter the same ; to the great terror,
annoyance, and danger of the said deputy
lieutenants; one of whom, and who was also
a justice of the peace, attempted in vmu, and
at different times, to read the act of George
the first, commonly called the Riot act, but
was prevented by the violence and outrageous
proceedings of the said mob; and when the
said deputy lieutenants, went into the street
to endeavour to preserve the peace, they were
assaulted hi a violent manner with sticks and
stones, and otherwise maltreated and insulted
by the said mob : In consequence of all which
outrageous and violent proceedings, the said
deput^lieutenants were at that time compelled
to desist from the execution of their duty : And
they the said deputy lieutenants, having, in
consequence of what they had previously
learned as to the intentions of the said mob,
considered it absolutely necessary for their
own safety, and for the support and protec-
tion of the law, to call in the aid of the mili-
tary, then stationed at Haddington, being a
detachment of the Cinque Port light dragoons,
then under the command of captain David
Finlay ; also of a party of the Yeomanry Vo-
lunteer cavaky of the said county of Hadding-
ton, whom it was found afterwards necessary
to reinforce by a detachment of the Pein-
brekeshire cavaliy, .under the command of
captain John Price, from the troops then en-
camped at Musselburgh, the nud riotous and
disorderly, amon^ whom were the afore-
named persons above eompbined on, who
took an active and leading diare in the said
not, didtheaand there vtelentW^ assault with

II

sumts, bhidgeoos, and ^other offensive
pons, the said mditary so assemblied for ino-
tection of the said deputy lieutenants, and in
support of the law, and did wound, and se-
verely bruise, to the effusion of tlieir blood,
and imminent danger of their lives, -seveial of
the ssud military ; And the said military hav-
ing for a considerable time, and notwithstand-
ing of the great violence of the said mob, en-
deavoured to persuade the said persons, thus
riotously assembled, among vrhom were the
afore-named persons above complained on,
to desist from their violent and outrageoas
proceedings ; they were at last in consequence
of orders given them, by some one or other
of the said deputy lieutenants and with a riwr
to protect themselves as well as the said de-
puty lieutenants (who were in imminent
danger of their lives) from the fury and vio-
lence of the said mob, compelled to resist
force by force ; in consequence of which, se-
veral of the sud persons thus riotously assem-
bled lost their lives, and others of theiti were
severely wounded, all of which was occasioned
by the violent and outrageous proceedings
of the said mob, and in which the persons
above complained on took an active and
leading part: And the said David Duncan
having;»on the Slst day of August 1797, been
brought before William Law, esq. sheriff sub-
stitute of the shire of Haddington, did in his
presence emit and sign a declaration; And
the said Elizabeth or £Uy Duncan having, oa
the said 31sCday of August 1707, been brought
before George Buchan Hepburn, esq* of Smea*
ton, one of the justices of the neace for the
county of Haddmgton, did in nis presence
emit a declaration which, as she said she
could not write, was signed by the said George
Buchan Hepburn : And the said John Nicol-
son, and Francis Wilson having, on the 1st
day of September, 1797, been broueht before
the said George Buchan Hepburn, did in his
presence emit and sign two separate declara-
tions respectively : And the said Robert Mit-
chel and Neil Reidpath having, on the said
1st day of September, 1797, been brought be-
fore the right honourable the earl of Hadding-
ton, did in 1:^ presence. emit and sign two
separate declarations respectively. All which
declarations above libelled, together w th a
paper addressed thus, *' To the Honourable
Gentlemen assembled at Tranent, for the pur-
pose of raising six thousand Militia men in
Scotland,'* and which appears to hear <dato
the 29th of August, 1797, and has a number
of si^scriptions wrote in a circular manner
annexed thereto: As also a letter bearii^
date St. Germains, Monday, half->past nine,
(signed) ** D.Anderson," and addressed," Cap-
tain Finlay, or the Commattding officer, Had-
dington,'' win all be used in evidence against
the said ^persons above complained on, and
will for that purpose be lodged in due time in
tlie hands of the ^erk df theHigh Goutt of
Juetkiary, before whkb they areto betried,
that they nay have an opportunitjr^f ^feeing

831 ] S7 GEORGE III. Trial qf A. Duncan, NeO RMpath, and [832

the tame. At least at lime and place above
libelled, the aforesaid riotous and outrageous
proceedings took place, and the afore-named
persons above complained on, or one or other
of them, are guilty actors or art and part in the
aforesaid crime or crimes ; all which, or part
thereof being found proven by the verdict of
an assize, before our lord justice general, lord
justice clerk, and lords commissioners of jus-
ticiary, in a court of justiciary, to be holden
by them within the criminal Court-house of
Edinburgh, upon the ninth day of October
next to come ; the said persons above com-
plained on, ought to be punished with the
pains of law to deter others from committing
the like crimes, in all time coming.

Follow the declarations of the panels li-
belled on.

In the petition for the procuraror fiscal anent
the riot at Tranent ;

Declaration of D. Duncak.

Haddington f 31 August, 1797.— Compeared
David Duncan, coallier in Penston, who being
examined and interrogated, declares, that he
was at Tranent on Wednesday last, by ten
o'clock in the forenoon, for a pair of shoes to
his wife. That he continued there till the
riot began, and for a good while aAer. That
he had a large stick in his hand. Acknow-
ledges that when Mr. Cadell was reading, or
attempting to read, the Riot act, at the house
of John Glen, he the declarant threw a stone
at the window, but which did not strike him,
Mr. Cadell, though he intended that it should.
Denies that he threw a stone at eaptain Finlay,
or that he shakcd his stick at him, but ac-
knowledges that he gave him bad names, and
that he picked up a sword which fell from
captain Finlay, and carried it into a house.
Admits that he made a stroke at major
Wight at Thinent, upon Tuesday last, when
the said major Wight was endeavouring to
apprehend him, and after he had knocked
him, the declarant, down. Acknowledges
that when major Wight was mentioning the
intention of the meeting of the deputy lieute-
nants at the door of John Glen's house, the
declarant interrupted him, and said, that they
would have no militia, for that they never had a
militia in Scotland. And declares all this is
truth, and three words delete before signing.
In witness whereof the declarant has su6-
scribed this declaration, consisting of this and
the preceding page, before Henry Davidson,
writer, in Haddington, and Donald Mac Don-
ald^ residenter there.

(Signed) David Duncak.

William Law.

Henry Davidson, Witness.

Donald Macdonald, Witness.

In the Precognition anent the Riot and
Obstruction of the Militia Act at Tra-
pent;

Declaration of £. Duncan.

Haddington, August 31, 1797. — Appeared
£]ly Duncan, present prisoner in the Tolbooth
of Haddington, who being examined, declares
that she is servant to John Davidsoir, coallier
in Elphingston, and that she went to Tranent
on Tuesday last about ten o'clock, being sent
by her mistress to get some sarken cloth for
her use, at Mr. Pringle*s, shop-keeper at Tra-
nent ; that she did not call for the cloth at
the shop, but she went to the street to look
for her father; that when she first went to
Tranent, she went to the house of Tibby Selkry,
where she staid a considerable time, and that
there were a great many people in the house,
but she does not recollect any conversation ;
that she was afterwards taken prisoner by
captain Finlay, and declares this is truth, and
that she cannot write. This declaration was
emitted before the under-subscribing justice
of peace, and the following witnesses :

(Signed) Geo. Buchan Hepburn.
Henry Davidson, Witness.
Donald M'Donald, Witness.

In the Precognition anent the Rtot and
Obstruction of the Militia Act at Tra-
nent;

Declaration of J. Nicolson.

Haddington, Sept, 1, 1797. — Compeared
John Nicolson, servant to Mr. Park, at
Windymains, present prisoner in the Tolbooth
of Haddington, who being examined and in-
terrogated, declares that his name was upon
Humbie Kirk porch upon Sunday, as within
the age of the statute, and he. came to Tra-
nent on the Tuesdaji, as he understood the
order upon the said church required him to
appear; that the mob was beginhing when
the declarant came in ; that he satv a great
part of the military at the east end of the
town, and a few at the door of John Glen*s;
that he came so far down the town, and went
into the house of James Irvine, cow-keeper,
where he remained during all the time of the
riot, and he heard the nrin» while there ;
that after the firing ceased, he left that house,
and on his way home, he was taken prisoner
by the military, about hsdf a mile from Tra-
nent; that he never looked out of the said
house, during the time of the said riot. De-
clares that he had only a small walking stick
in his hand. Declares that he never, during
the whole course of the day, lifted or threw a
single stone at the military, and adds that he
is certain Irvine, his wife and daughter, and
another woman, were in the house during the
time of the riot; and can declare that the
declarant was also there the whole time, and
declares all this is truth.

(S^ed) John Nicolson* •
Geo. f ucban Hepburn.
Henry D^^vioson^ Witvess,

883] Robert Mitchell./or Mobbing and Rioting. A. D. 1797.

[834

Iir the Petition or Precognition anent the
Riot and Obstruction of the Militia Act
at Tranent ;

Dbclabation of F. WiLSOir.

Haddington, Sept, 1, 1797. — Compeared
Francis Wilson, merchant in Tranent, pre-
sent prisoner in the Tolbooth of Uaddineton ;
who being examined and interrosateo, de-
clares, that he never was out of nis house
during the whole time of the riot at Tranent
on Tuesday last ; that he never attended any
meeting antecedent to that riot ; that on the
Monday night previous to the riot, and after
dark, he saw a arum beat through the streets,
and followed by a considerable multitude;
the drum as he thinks was beat by a man,
but owing to the darkness of the night he
cannot be certain, and indeed he was not
aaiious to see or have any intercourse with
these people; that after the riot wa^ over, an
order was issued for every house door and
window in Tranent to be shut, and the de-
clanuit was active in obeying it; that pre-
vious to this order, the following persons had
taken refuge in the declarant's house, and he
thought himself happy in having it in his
power to keep them there, viz. William Reid,
coallier; John King, coallier, in Penston;
John Connel, coallier there; Mathew Smith,
eoallier there; James Henderson and Edward
Henderson, both from Penston; William Do-
naldson, coallier at Fallside, and Francis Do-
naldson, also coallier from that pkice. And
declares, that all these people came into his
house an hour before the riot began, and re-
mained there till taken out bv captain Finlay
and some of the military, after the riot was
over; that the declarant was also taken pri-
soner by the military, and was found con-
cealed in a closet, into which the anxiety of
his wife had compelled him to go; that the
declarant was informed yesterday by his bro-
ther, that a man from Ormiston, whose name
his brother did not know, was seen durinsp
the time of the riot upon a house top. and
that this roan was dressed in green ; declares,
that afier the declarant was taken prisoner,
and placed along with the others, when cap-
tain Finlay asked his name, he answered
that his name was Harry Dundas, and im-
mediately afler, when Mr. Cadell asked the
same question, he, the declarant, told his real
name; and declares alPthis is truth, three

words delete before signing.
(Si|^) Fi
Geo. Bucsah Hbpburv.

BANcis Wilson.

In the Precognition anent the Riot and
Obstruction of the Militia Act at Tra-
nent;

DSCLABATION OF R. MiTCHELL.

Sa^ddtngtan^ Sa>t, 1, 1797.— In presence of
the right hon. the earl of Haddmgton, ap-
peared Robert Mitchell, present pnsoner m
the Tolboolh of Haddington, who, bdng ei-

WIhXXVI.

amined, declares that he is servant to An-
drew Bkur, corn-dealer in Tranent ; that last
Tuesday his master sent him down to the
house of John Glen, where the gentlemen
were met, in order to show them that he was
above the age ascertained by the act of par-
liament for the militia ; that while he was in
Glen's kitchen, the mob from without as-
saulted the house with stones, many of which
came into the kitchen, and put the declarant
in fear of his life ; that the declarant then \e(t
Glen's house, and went into one on the oppo-
site side of the street belonging to James Ir-
vine, where he remained till the mob was over ;
that he found Irvine's wife and daughter in
the house at the time, as also John Nicol-
son, present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Had-
dington ; that he was in Irvine's house before
the military began to fire, and the firing
ceased before he left it. Declares that he
had no stick in his hand that day ; that he
took no share in the mob ; and in particular,
that he never attempted to liA a stone that
day. Declares, that a sword had been thrown
into Irvine's house during the riot, which he
afterwards understood belonged to captain
Finlay; that captain Finlay himself came
some time after to that house in search of his
sword, which was delivered to hini by Irvine's
daughter, at which time he seeing the de-
clarant sitting in the house, took him pri-
soner; and declares all this is truth.

(Signed) Robebt Mitchell.
Haddihotok.

In the Precognition anent the Riot and
Obstruction of the Militia Act at Tra-
nent;

Declaration or N. Rbxdpath.

Haddington^ Sept. 1, 1797.— In presence of
the rijht hon. the earl of Haddington, appeared
Neil Reidpath, present prisoner in the Tolbooth
of Haddington ; who, being examined, de-
clares, fhat he is servant to Mr. Dickson, in
Lempoch-wells; acknowledges that he went
to Tranent on Tuesday last, in order to see
the mob which was expected that dav, as he
had heard the night before at Pencaitland that
there was to be a mob at Tranent next day ;
that the person ^ho told him so was Thomas
Middlemas, a fellow-servant of his, who said
there would be a mob on account of giving
up the names for the militia act. Declares,
that {iSiddlemas accompanied him to Tranent,
and that they went away without askins
liberty firom Uteir master ; that they both had
sticks in their hands, but that they were of a
common size. Declares, that as soon as ever
the mob began to throw stones, the declarant
and other two persons ran down a close, and
went into a house, whore they staid about an
hour; that he does not know the names of
these two persons. Acknowledges upon re-
collection that the roilitarv had begun to fire
before he ran down the close, and went into
the house as above mentioned. Declares that

3U

835} 37 GEORGE HI. Trial of A. Duncan, NM Reidpath, and [830^

he saw several women throwing ttones that | L^4«^f for ElizabeUi or EUy Duncan, re^
day, but did not observe any men throwing l presented- that she cannot ^ to trial on the

stones. Declares most solemnly that he threw
no stones or sUcks at the military or any other
person that day. Declares that after the town
negan to turn quiet, he went away homewards,
when he was overtaken by some soldiers
about a mile to the southward of Tranent,
who took him prisoner ; and declares all this
truth, one wora delete before »gning.

(Signed) Neil Retdpath.
Haddikgton.

John Somervail, Witness.

Peter Williams, Witness^

George Cawns, Witneu

And David Duncan, coallier, in Pension ;
Francis Wilson, merchant, in Tranent; and
John Nicolson, servant to Archibald Park,
at Windymains, also indicted in the said libel,
being oft'times called in court, and three
times at the door of the court-house, by a
macer of court, they failed to appear.

Whereupon, his msyesty's advocate moved,
that sentence of outlawry and fugitation might
be pronounced against them, and that the
bonds of caution granted for their appearance
might be forfeited. The lord justice elerk,
and lords commisuoners of justiciary, de-
cern and adjudge the said David Duncan,
Francis Wilson^ and John Nicolson, tp be out-
laws and fugitives from his majesty's laws,
and ordain Uiem to be put to his highnesses
horn, and all their moveable goods and gear
to be escheat and inbrought to his majesty's
nse, for their contempt and disobedience in
not appearing this day and place, in the hour
of cause, to nave underlyen the law for the
crimes of mobbing and riot, and others as
specified in the said crimimd lybel raised
agunst them thereanent, as they who were
lawfully cited to that effect, and oft*times called
in court, and three times at the door of the
court-house, and failing to appear as sieud is;
and further the said lords diechu*e the bonds
of caution granted for the appearance of the
8ud persons to be forfeited, and ordain the
penalties therein contained to be recovered by
the clerk of this court, to be disposed of as the
"Court shall direct

(Signed) Robert M'Quesv, J. P. D.

The libel being read over to the panels in
open court, and they being severally inter-
rogated thereupon, they all answered not
guilty.

ProcurtUort for the Proieettfiofi.— Robert
Dundas, esq. of Amiston, his Majesty's Ad-
vocate [afterwards Lord Chief Buon dT the
Exchequer]; Mr. Robert Blair, Advocate, his
Ma^sty*s Solicitor General [afterwtfds Lord
President of the Court of Session] ; Mr. John
Burnett, Advocate.

Troeuraion for the PaneU.^Mt. Jphn
Clerk, Mr. Wilter Scott, Mr. IL D. ftglii,
Mr. James L'Amy, Advocates.

present libel, because that is not her name ;
that the name of the person now at the bar
is Alison Duncan ;* and he produced in evi-
dence of this a certificate of her baptism where
she is called Alison; and farther, that hei»
ready to prove by the session clerk now pro*
sent in court, and ready to produce the re-
cord, so her name cannot in any shape be
brought to answer to the name given to her ia
the libel ; that this is unquestionably a rele-
vant defence against any proceedings being
had upon the present libel against the persoii
at the bar, and therefore craved that she be
dismissed.

Advocaita, answered, that the person now at
the bar, calling herself Alison Duncan, gave
up her name to be Elly Duncan ; and she is sa
named in her declaration, when examined^
and therefore he submitted how far she might
not be tried under the name and designation
given her in the libel.

Hugh Ramn^f the session derk being caUed*
upon, was exammed upon oath ; and produced
tho record of baptisms, for the parish of Glads-
rouir. Whereupon the Court pronounced the
following interlocutor :

The lordf justice clerk, and lords commis-.
sioners of justiciary, having considered what
is before represented^ with the deposition of
the session clerk, and certificate and record
produced; they sustain the objection for the.
said Alison Duncan, and dismiss her from the
bar.

(Signed) Robert McQueen, J. P. D.

Clerk, for the panel Mitchell, represented,
that he had no objections to offer to the rele-
vancy of the libel. — ^That he denied that his
client had any acces^on to the riot libelled.
That he attended at Tranent on the 39th of
August last for the purpose of getting his
name struck out of the list made up by the
schoolmaster, as he was above the age speci-
fied in the militia act, a certificate of which he
carried along with him, and remained in the
house where the deputv lieutenants were, till
he was driven out by tne violence of the mob,
when he went into a house opposite, and re-
mained there till the mob had ceased.

Scott, for the panel Reidpath, represented
that he did not mean to object to therelevancy
of the libel.— That his client had gone to
Tranent, on the day libelled for the purpose
of getting bis name struck out of the militia
hs^ as he was above the age ; but had no
concern whatever with the disgraceful pro-
ceedings of the mob there assembled.

The lord justice clerk, and lords commis-
sioners of justiciarv, having oonadered Uie
criminal lil!el raised and pursued aft the in-

* See thecasepfFyshePalmec, anti, voL
S3, pp. 344, ei m. and Humefs Cpmm, tl^er»
cited. See also Mr. Hui»e*s SupplemiOtai
Notesy Numbess 200, S07j and ^.

SS73 RtitH HetektUfJbr MMmg mi Skting. A. D. 1797.

[8S8

ttBDccofbb nujesty't sdvocmtey for his map
jesty's interesty against Robert Mitchell and
Weil Reidpathy panels; they find the libel re-
levant to infer the pains of law ; but allow the
iwnelsy and each of them, to prove all facts
and circumstances that may tend to excul-
pate them, or either of them, or alleviate their
niilt : and remit the panels with the libel as
S)und relevant, to the knowledge of an assize.
(Signed) RoBBRT M^Qubbw, J. P. D.

The followinff persons were then named to
pass upon uie assize of the panels.

Rohcfi Norrkf painter in Edinburgh.

WiUumLsne^ upholsterer there.

William Ceoptr^ upholsterer there.

WiUiam Fetiet^ merchant there.

John Milnfj founder there.

James Milne, tanner there.

Jamet Wation, painter there.

Walter Brunton, saddler there.

Francii Shieldi, baker there.

Jamei Cooper, merchant there.

KewkHh M^Kenuie, apothecary there.

WiUiam Allan, roercnant there.

James Inglis, merchant there.

Jokn Deas T^homson, insurance-hroker there.

Adam Freer, merchant there.

Who were all bwfully sworn, and no objec*
lion on the contrary.

The procurators for the prosecutor pro-
'Ceeded to adduce the following witnesses in
proof of the libel ; who being all lawfiillv
sworn, puiged of malice and partial counsel,
emitted their depositions vivA voce, m pre-
sence of the Court and Jury wiUiout being re-
duced into wnting, in terms of the statute.

1. David Anderson, esq. of St. Gerroains.

2. John Cadell, esq. of Cockenzie.

3. Major Andrew Wight, residing at Or-
niston in the county of Haddintt;ton.

4. Captain David Finle^, of the Cinque
Fort Light Dragoons.

5. Captain Jhhn Price of the Pembioke
civalnr.

6. ueorgeS^eJ/, slater in Tranent

7. John Glen, vintner there.

8. Michael Bingham, of the Cinque Port
cavalry.

9. William Scdki^ of the Cinque Port ca-
taliy.

10. John Eawlins, of the CinquePort cavalry.

11. Jamet German, of the Cinque Port c»-
Talry.

IS. E^HundColtartfOfihe Cinque Port car
If airy.

13. William Wikon, coallier at Penston.

The jproeecutor being about to adduce e^
ienee for proving the declarations of the pa-
nels libelled on, the counsel for the panels ju-
dicii^ admitted that these dedaratloiis were
«inltlM by the panels voluntarily and freely,
^lh« dates they bear, and that they wens
thmi sober, and in their sound senses.

John Clerk.

Waltxe Scott.

Hoaut M'quazji, J. K D.

The declarations libelled on were then read
over in open court.

Whereupon, hb majesty's advocate declared
the evidence in proof of the libel concluded ;
and the procurator for the panel Robert Mit-
chell, adduced the following witnesses in ex-
culpation of the said Robert Mitchell.

1. AndresD Blair, corn-dealer in Tranent.

S. Mrs, Blair, wife of the said Andrew
Blair.

3. John Barclay, servant to George Tod at
Ormbton.

4. Jtfiif Gkn, daughter of John Glen, a
witness for the prosecutor.

5. Peter Scott, wright in Tranent.

Whereupon the procurator for the said Ro-
bert Mitchell declared his evidence in excul-
pation closed. — And the procurators for the
panel Neil Retdpath adduced the following
witnesses in exculpation of the said Neil Reidw
path.

1. George Dickson, tenant in Lampock-
wells, in the county of Haddington.

2. DavidBrotherstoneSj servant to WiUiam
Hunter, brewer in Pencaitland.

It being observed by the Court that the
said David Brotherstones had been guilty
of conceading the truth upon oath. —
Therefore the said lords ordain him to be
carried to the Tolbooth of Edinburgh;
therein to be detained till Friday nex^ at
ten o'clock forenoon, and then to be set
at liberty.

(Signed) Robeet McQueen, J. P. D.

3. David Williamson, tenant in Fallside.

4. John Brown, tenant in Millhill.

The two following witnesses were adduced
in farther exculpation of the panel Robert
Mitchell

Jean Irvimg, daughter ofjamea Irving^ eow-
feeder inTlrahent.

Jean Neil, spouse of James Home, labourer
in Tranent

Afrf . Irving, wife of James Irving, cow*
feeder in Tianent.

Whereupon the procurators for the panels
dedured their evidence in exculpation to be
concluded.

The evidence was then summed up» on the'
part of the prosecution, by his majesty's ad-
vocate, on the part or the panel Reidpatb by
Walter Scott, advocate, on the part of the pa-
nel Mitchell bv Mr. John Clerk, advocate,
and lastly by the lord justice^lerk.

The lord Justice clerk, and lords eons-
missioners ofjusticiary^ oraain the assize in-
stantly to inclose in this place, and to return
their veidici in the same place, to-morrow, at
twelve o'clock noon ; continue the diet against
the panels, and whole other diets of court, till
that time, and ordain the haiil fifteen assizers
and all concerned then to attend, each under
the pains of law ; and ordain the panels in the
mean time to be carried to the Tolbooth of
Edinburgh.

(^igntd) Robert M'Queev, J. P. B*

899] 37 GEORGE IIL Trial of James Dunnjbr conspiring [840

Curia Justiciariay S. D. N. Regis teota in
Nova SessionisDomode Edinburgh, duo-
decimo die Octobns, millesimo 8q>lin-
eenlesimo et nonoeesimo septimo.^Per
hoDorabiles viros, Robertum M'Queen
de Braxfield, DominumJusticiarium Cleri-
curo, Joanneiu Swinton de Swinton, Do-
ntinum GulielmumN^rne deDunsinoan,
Baronetum, et Davidem Smyth de Meth-
ven, DominosCommissionanosJusticia-
ric dicti S. D. N. Regis.

Curia legitime aifirmata.

Intran,

Neil Reidpath, servant or late servant to
George Dickson, tenant in Lampockwells,
in the county of Haddington, and

Robert MUchell, servant or late servant to
Andrew Blair, corn-dealer in Tranent, Pa-
nels.

Indicted and accused as in the preceding
sederunt.

The persona who passed upon the assize of
the panels, returned the following verdict.

At Edinburgh, the Uth day
of October in the year
1797:

The above assize having inclosed, made
choice of the said William Fettes to be their
chancellor, and of the said John Deas Thom-
son to be their clerk, and having considered

the criminal libel raised and pursued at tbt
instance of his majesty's advocate, for his ma-
jesty's interest, against Neil Reidpath and
Robert Mitchell, Panels ; the interlocutor of
relevancy pronounced thereon b^ the Court;
the evidence adduced in proof of the indict-
ment; and the evidence adduced in exculpar
tiou; — ^They all, in one voice, find the libel
not proven. In witness whereof their said
chancellor and clerk, have subscribed these
presents, consisting of this and the preceding
page, in their names, and b^ their appoint-
ment, place and date aforesaid.
(Signed) W. Fettes, Chancelior,

J. D. Tbomsov, Ckrk.

The lord justice clerk, and lords commis-
ttoners of justiciary, in respect of the forego-
ing verdict, assoilzie the panels simpUciter,
and dismiss them from the oar.

(Signed) Robebt McQueen, J. P. D *

There are various other indictments on re-
cord, for riots in opposition to the militia laws :
Some of them stronger cases than the pre-
sent, followed by convictions. But they are
not of sufficient importance or interest to be
here inserted.

* See in this Vdume, the case of Cameron
and Menzies, A. D. 1798.

624. Proceedings on the Trial of James Dunn for Conspiring
to Murder the Bight Honourable Henry Lawes Luttrell,
Earl of Carhampton ; tried before the Court holden under
a Commission of Oyer and Terminer at Dublin, on Mon-
day October 23rd: 37 George HI. a. d. 1797.*

CoMMissioir. *

Mondmf^ October 23rd, 1797.

JiM^et.— i-The hon. Robert Boyd, and hon.
wtlliam Downes, two of the Justices of
bis Majesty's Court of King's-bench.

The grand jury of the city of Dublin having
at the last commission found the following
bill of indictment, the persons therein namec^
were then arraigned : —

Counfyrfthe city of) ThE jurors of our lord
D116/111 to wU $ the king upon their oath
present, that James Dunn, Maurice Dunn,
Patrick Carter, Peter Reily, Edward Martin.
John Brodenck, William Carria^^ Michael
FarrelL Thomas Bourke, James Fairweather,
John Taaffe, Mathew Lawler, Patrick Hickey,

. • Reported by William Ridgeway. esq. bar^
nsteratkw. ^ "^'^

James Bacon, George Ryan, William Darcev,
Garrett Byrne, Thomas Byrne, John Farrell,
Patrick 0*Neil, John Whelan, and Miles
Dignan, being evil, wicked disposed and de-
signing persons, on the 7th day of Ma^, in the
Srth year, &c. at Strand- street, &c. wickedly,
wilfufiy, maliciously and feloniously did con-
spire, confederate, and aeree together, and to
and with each other, wilfully, feloniously, and
of their malice prepensed to kill and murder
Henry Lawes Luttrell, earl Carhampton^ then
and there being a true and &ithful subject of
our said lord the king, against the p«u:e of
our said lord the king, his crown and dignity,
and against the form of the statute in thai
case made and provided.

The prisoners severally pleaded, not piilty,
and beuiR this day brought up fur trial, were
asked. Whether they would join in their
challenges?— Answered in the negative:--^
Whereupon Jamet Dunn was put upon bie
trial alone*

8il]

to Murder Lard Carkamptam*

A. D. 1797.

[848

> Coutud/or ihe CrMm.— The Attorn^ Ock
neral [The Right Hod. Arthur Wolfe, after-
wards Viscount Kiiwarden, and Lord Chief
Justice of the Court of King's- bench.]
The Prime Serjeant [James Fitigerald.]
The Solicitor General [John Toler, after-
wards lord Norbury and Lord Chief Justice of
the Court of Common Pleas]. Mr. J. S.
Townsend, Mr. Ridgeway, Mr. Mackenna.
Jgeni, — Mr. Kemmis.

Countel for the Frisoner.^Mr, Curran
[afterwards Master of the Rolls.] Mr. Mao-
nally, Mr. Jonas Greene, Mr. Emmett

Agent,-^Mr. Dowling.

The sherifis returned the panel, which was
called over, and the juiy sworn, in the follow-
ing order :

Richard Manders, merchant, challenged
peremptorily by the prisoner.

Patrick Bride, esq. sworn.

William Thompson, e»q. challenged per*
einptorily by the prisoner.

George Carletun, merchant, sworn.

William Lindsay, merchant, challenged
peremptorily by the prisoner.

James Blacker, merchant, sworn.

Samuel Rosborough, merchant, challenged
peremptorily by the prisoner.

Richaid Wilson, merchant, same.

William French, esq. sworn.

Drury Jones, merchant, challenge per-
emptorily by the prisoner.

William Duncan, merchant, sworn.

Oliver 0*Hara, merchant, set by on the part
of the crown,

William Bean, merchant, sworn.

Edmond Nugent, challenged perempturily
fay the prisoner.

Mark Bxiberts, merchant, same.

Patrick Ewing, merchant, set by on the
part of the crown.

Daniel Maguire, merchant, same.

William Tenant, merchant, sworn.

J. Fitzgerald, merchant, challenged per-
emptorily by the prisoner.

John Lyons, merchant, same.

I«wis Bodgson, merchant, sworn.

James Kins, merchant, challenged per-
«ns|ptoriIy by the prisoner.

Thomas Prentice, merchant, set by on the
part of the crown.

Meade Nesbitt, esq. challenged peremptorily
by the prisoner.

Robert Burton, esq. sworn.

George Simpson, merchant, sworn.

* Saundfoid, esq. challenged peremp-

torily by the prisoner.

Peter Roe, merchant, set by on the part of
Jibe crown.

Thomas Kellet, merchant, challenged per-
«iTOtorily by the prisoner.

Williajn Howard, merchant, same.

William Lancake, merchant, same.

Ambme Leet, esq. sane.

^^onitnin Gmitieiv merchasi, swoto.

George Raffsrty, merchant, challenged
peremptorily^by the prisoner.

Williaiii Uumfries, merchant, set by on the
part of the crown.

Samuel Smilh, merchant, same.

F. J. Brady, merchant, same.

George Rawdon, merchant, same.

Joshua Manders, merchant, challenged per«
emptorily by the prisoner.

The panel being gone through, the clerk of
the crown called the first person set aside on
the part of the crown.

Oliver CfHara, sworn*

THE JURY.

Patrick Bride,
George Carleton,
James Blacker,
William French,
William Duncan,
William Bean,

William Tenant,
Lewis Hodgson,
Robert Burton,
George Simpson,
Cornelius Gautier,
Oliver 0*Hara.

To whom the prisoner was given in charge.
Mr. M*Kenna opened the indictment.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL — My Lords, and
Gentlemen ofthe Jury;— I am directed offi-
cially, on the part of the crown, to prosecute
the prisoner at the bar. I should not, in a
case in which the prisoner is not entitled to
the same nrivilege by his counsel, trouble the
Court witn any statement, wero not the case
of so much importance to the morals of the
people, the good order of society, and the
public peace. I shall confine myself to the
leading circumstances of the case, wishing^ to
disclose to the world the situation in which
this conspiracy, prevailing in this country, at-
tempts to place the social order of the country.
— Hoping that if what I state shall appear m
evidence, it may have this efiect upon all who
shall become acquainted with tne circum*
stances— this salutary effect— that they mav
see the latal and horrible length, to which
delusion mav bring them; and that men
may know that when they enter into those
societies, they expose theniselves to crimes of
the most horrid and atrocious nature.

Gentlemen, the prisoner at the bar stailds
indicted for conspirine and confederating with
others to take away the life of the earl oT Car-
ham pton, which offence by the law of this
country is now a capital felony. It is fit I
should inform you as shortly as may be, how
that crime came to be a capital felony — ^not
that you or the Court have any thing to do
with the policy of the law— It exisU, and you
are to inquire whether the prisoner be guilty
of the fact charsed upon him, and the judges
are to execute the law, if the prisoner be found
g;uilty.— By the law of England, in early
times, it was a capital offence, to compass and
imagine the death of any man, a subject, or
the kins ; but in more modem times the fitct
of murder alone was considered capital, and
the erime of eompaanng the death was capital

843} S7 GEORGE III. Trial qfJantei Dunnjifr conspiring

CM4

only in iho case of the king, on account of the
interest which society has in his life. With
regai^ to a subject, the compassine of his
death became a misdemeanor merely. — ^Tbe
legislature did not see a necessity to mcrease
the punishment — ^The crime was scarcely
ever committed, and seldom even suggested
itself to the imagination of men. It was not
till of late — of very modem days— till the
foundation of that system which n^^ through
the country — when the nation was disgraced
by the frequent conspiracies to murder, that
the legislature finding the crime prevail, per-
mitted a bill to be introduced for the purpose
of making that crime a felony of death. That
bill three years since, passed through two
stages in the House of Commons—and then
trusting that an impression would be made by
what had passed there, such was the>inodera-
tion of the legislature, that they adjourned
the conuderation of the bill to a distant day,
and it did not pass in that session. Unhap-
pily, the expectation entertained proved
groundless ;— the crime became more preva-
lent, and two years after, the legislature was
compelled to pass a law making conspiracy
fek>ny^ of deatn. Gentlemen, to state what
the crime is must be sufficient to show that no
punishment is too severe. The crime must
De this:— Two persons at least deliberately
agree upon the murder of another. The mind
must approve putting out of society for ever,
the man capable of such a crime.

But, gentlemen, that- is not for your consi*
deration. All vou have to inquire is, whether
James Dunn, tlie prisoner at the bar, did con-
spire with any of the persons named in the in-
dictment to take away the life of the earl of
Carhampton.

I will now state as briefly as I can, the
evidence that is to be laid before youi^-It
will appear, that there was, in the city of
Dublin, a society, known by the appellation
of ^ United Irishmen."— That society is di>
vided into a vast number of societies, con-
nected with each other progressively l^ Baro-
Qial Committees, Provmcml and NaUonal
Committees.— What may be the professed ob*
jects of the society, it is not for me to state.
But it will appear by the trial of this day, if I
am rightly instructed, that those objects are
attempted to be obtained, by murder and de-
liberate assassination assassination, not

casually to be committed by individuals of the
society— not perpetrated through the mistaken
«eal of an individual-*-but it will appear, that
these assassins come out of the society itself
and are supported b^ the pay of the society,
«ven to their protection if brought to triaL

Gentlemen, if I am rl^htljr instructed, it
wiH appear, that the assassination intended in
thiacaae, was promoted by a society of United
IitshnwD, which agreed to pay with Baronial
nwoqr, the persons who snoold commit the
•wiMiBsinatiiMi-

Gentlemen, I hopel nu^ be pardoned— I '
<b not stale these drcomtlaiices to make an

impression upon your minds-— I do it, in per*
haps the mistaken, but certainly the anxioaa
hope, that the knowledge of these facts may

Sroduce an effect upon those who have been
eluded hitherto, and upon those upon whom
delusion may hereafter be attempted^— That
while they are told they are only to assist to
bring about some constitutional improvement,
men may know they are enlisted to commit
crimes the most disgraceful to human nature
— that they may learn that the sixpences they
contribute to the common fund mav be the
wages of assassination, perhaps of their best
friends and patrons, discharging the duties of
the stations m which they are j^aced.

Gentlemen, it will appear, that in one of
those societies, which assembled in tliis city
upon the 7th of May last, in the morning, the

Prisoner at the bar, of the name of James
^unn, a blacksmith and &rrier in the service
of lord Carhampton, resident at his gate at
Luttrelstown in the county of Dublin, came
to the society, got himself introduced, at the
instance of the man of the house where the
society was assembled, and did deliberately
propose to assist their cause by taking away
the life of the earl of Carhampton. Previous
to his beine received to make this proposition,
he was calwd upon to show he was an United
Irishman, whicn he did by the signs known
among them :— thus accredited he made his
proposition*— the society acceded to it: — ho
was asked, who could assist him : — ^he said,
there were many to stand by him, but there
were three or four, upon whom he could par-
ticularly neljr. He was desired to come i^in
in the evening — where he would meet the
same persons, and to bring with him the
persons he mentioned.— He did accordindy
come.— But the society conceiving, that the
assembling of sixteen persons, together with
the assassins, might excite some suspicion,
appointed a commUtee of tutammUum^ consist-
ing of seven members, who were to concert
the business with Dunn and his party. Thus
sixteen men, assembled upon a Sunday morn-
ing, unheated by liquor, unprovoked by passion
or injury, do hear proposed from a member of
their society, a scheme to murder the earl of
Carhampton, they take an oath to keep secret
and to effect the phin, and they appoint a com-
mittee of assassination to execute their horrid
purpose.

It will appear, that in the evenmg, Dunn
camCi with three others, whose names are
mentioned in the indictment—that in the
evening, the committee of assassination sat —
they examine Dunn and his associates, where
they lived| and who thev were ; and such in-
quiry was made, andsucn answers given as to
satisfy the committee, that th^ were persons
to be relied upon in the work they were 10 un-
dertake. A scheme was proposed by tba
prisoner at the bar for the purpose of carrying
their design into effect^that scheme was dis-
approved of, and a member proposed another,
which with some yariation w«aadopl«(t The

845J

to Murder Lord Cartmnpfan*

A. D. IW.

C8I&

committee adjourned with sn intention, that
this scheme should be eiecuted upon the
ensuing Sunday.

Lord Carbaroptup bad made it a practice,
when the duties of -his office permitted him,
to en to his seat at Luttrelstown upon Sundays ;
ana it will appear that by the plan agreed
upon, Dunn and the others of the committee
were to eet horses, and upon Sunday overtake
his lordship's carriage, and discham blunder-
busses into it from the rear, wnile others
were to get forward, discharge pistols into the
side windows, and to such lengths did their
diabolical purpose carry them, that they deter-
mined to put to death the unoffending postil-
lion, and the other servant attending the car-
ria^, and his lordship's aid-^de-camp, should
he accompany him.

It occurred however to some of the com-
mittee to be necessary to procure a sum of
money to enable them to provide horses, and
weapons. For that purpose they, apply to the
secretaiy and treasurer tor a sum oi money —
of ten or twelve guineas, which it seems they
thought sufficient to provide them with means
of putting to death the earl of Carhampton
and his attendants ; and this monev was to
be supplied from a fund raised by the small
contrioutions of the members of the various
societies.

The secretary of the Baronial Committee,
it seems, did not think himself warranted to
advance the mone^, and it became neceasary
to make an application to the secretary of
finance: — Bourke was therefore applied to;
he was foreman to Mr. Miles Dignan of
Grafton- street, and he said, that the thing
must be postponed, until Mr. O'Callashan,
who was a^ head of the finance, should re-
cover. Bourke was one of the sixteen at the
first meeting, and though he mentioned that
the matter must be postponed for the reason
he stated, yet he recommended strongly, as
more adviseable, to execute the plan imrae-
diatelv, saying that he entertained no doubt
that the money would be had afterwards.

Gentlemen, this plan was to have been
carried into execution upon the 14th of May;
but the means not being had| Dunn came to
town that day, attended^ by Carty and others
his companions, to deliberate with the com-
mittee of assassination; and upon his return
home, he, together with Carty, was arrested.

Gentlemen, I do not take up your time mth
a more minute detail of the particuters. The
chairman of the committee, James Ferris,
had, previous to the meeting of the 7th of
Majy, seeins the dangerous tendency of the
society, informed lora Carhampton of tti
▼iewsj and lord Carhampton recommended
to him not then to quit the society, for he
might make discoveries useful to the state.
Afterwards this proposition . to murder the
earl of Carhampton was madei which Fettis
immediately disclosed.

If, Aeatlemeny this outline of the facts be
proved^ you can have no hesitation in finding

the prisoner guilty. These fiwts are con-
firmed from the mouth of the prisoner. A^et
he was apprehended, he did, in a conversation,
where neither hopes nor fears were excited to
influence his mind, admit to lord Carhampton,
that he had entered into the conspiracy, and
had determined to take away his life : — He
did, as it were enthusiastically, admit and
glory in every thine he had determined to do ;
acknowledging at toe same time, that he bad
not received any injury from the earl of Car-
hampton. The particulars which passed, I
would rather you should hear from the wit*
nesses, than from me.

The next day af\er he had this conversa-
tion, lords Carhampton and EnniskiUen, ac-
companied by captain Eustace, saw the pri-
soner.— He had an opportunity of considenng
his situation : he did then declare his guilt —
averring, that as lord Carhampton was at the
head ofa party, and that it would bene6t the
cause in which he, the prisoner was engaged,
he resolved to put his lordship out of the
way.

This, gentlemen, is the outline of the case ;
you will hear the witnesses detail it more
particularly. If the prisoner be innocent, you
will have pleasure in acquitting him. But if
he be guilty, you have an important duty to
perform, to find a verdict that will, by deter-
ring others, preserve the lives of many ot
your fellow-creatures.

I hope the audience now assembled, and
others who may hear of this trial, will reflect
upon the situation in which these societies
place the persons who enter them; that when
they are contributing Uie produce of their in-
dustry, into the fjnds of these associations,
they do it for the hire of assassins, whose
da^rs are pointed at their best protector, as
in the present case lord Carhampton was to
fall by the liand of his servant, merely be-
cause he had discharged the duties, with
which he was entrusted, as a magistrate and a
general officer. The only reason which these
conspirators had for putting the earl of Car-
hampton to death was, that he had with an.
activity^ zeal, and ability unexampled, exerted.
himself to suppress insurrection, and to re-
store the peace of his country.*

Jama Ferrit sworn. — Examined by Hr«

Prime Serjeant,

Do you know a person of the name of
James Dunn } — I have seen him.

Point him out to the jury ?— There he is
[pointing to the prisoner.!

Do you recollect the 7tn of May last ?— Am
I at liber^ to recur to notes to assist my me-
mory?

Mr. M^Nally for the prisoner.

Wiken did you lake these notes } —A day or
two af^r.

^ As to this, see 9 Plowden^s Historil^ ^
Review of the State of Ireland, p. 537.

847]

S7 GEORGE III. Trial (/Jam^ Dunn/ar eompiritig

[848

Did you take iheni all at one time f— No,
because there were different times.
. Court, —Do you mean to say, that you
made those notes after each particular trans-
action f — Just so, my lord.

Mr. M^Nally. — On your oath, have you re-
vised or embellished those notes at any sub-
aemient time ? — I have.

Then these are not the very notes which
you first took down, but have been revised,
embellished, diminished, and increased for
the purpose of refreshing your memory f —
They are the same in effect.

Mr. M^Nally. — My lord^, I submit, that
these notes cannot be made use of.

Mr. Justice B<yd. — State what you can
from your recollection, and you may recur to
the notes afterwards, if necessary.

Mr. Prime Serjeant. — pid you see the pri-
soner upon the day I mentioned, the 7 th of
May?-! did.

Where?— In Strand-street.

That is in the county of the city of Dub-
lin ?— I believe it is.

Had you any acquaintance with him before
that day?— I never saw htm before in my
life.

Were you in the discharge of any duty that
day? — I was chairman of a meeting that day.

Where ?---In the house of Maurice Dunn,
in Strand-street.

There you saw the itrisoner ?— It was.

Was he introduoeu by any person?— He
was.

By whom ?— By Maurice Dunn, the man
of the house.

You were in the roc*mj and were called out?
— I was, by Maurice Dunn.

Who then introduced the prisoner to you ?
—He did.

As near as you can recollect, state what
passed between you and the prisoner upon
that occasion ? — After Maurice Dunn had in-
troduced the prisoner to me— Am I at liberty
to state what Maurice Dunn said?

Mr. Prime Serjeant. — Yes, if the prisoner
James Dunn were present ?— Maurice Dunn,
addressing himseU to me, said, ** This is a
partkular friend of mine; he has something
for the good of the cause to tell**-^! think
these were his' words— or " communicate"—
I do not exactly recollect which— *< Go aside
there both of you, and talk together^— and
says Maurice Dunn to James Dunn '* You
may tell him*' (meaning me) ** your mind"-~
Maurice Dunn then left us, and we went and
sat down together in one of tlie seaU of Mau-
rice Dunn's tap- room— he keeps a public-
house.

About what hour of the day was this?—
Between eight and nine in the morning to the
best of my recollection.

You sat down in ^e tap-room.?— I tat in
one of the seats.

Was there any other peraoo there ?— I do
not leoolJcct tfiert was : it was rather early in
tM morning.

What passed ? — Savs James Dunn, " I un-
derstand you are head of the meeting within .'^
I told him I was chairman.

What reply did he make? — *^ So the man
of the house was telling me, he is a name- sake
and relation of mine.*'

Well, sir f — " How do matters go on P" The
answer I made him was, ** swimmingly" — to
the best of my recollection.

Well, sir? — ** We hear down our side, that
Carhampton is a great eye- sore to matters."

Court. — Who said that? — ^The prisoner,
James Dunn, my lord.

Mr. Prime Serjeant^-^yfeW, sir? — ** We hear
that he is taking up people, and sending them
on board everv day." " So I hear" — was my
answer. — ** There are a few friends of us ; a
few more and I, who were putting our heads
tosether about doing him out."

Who said that?— Barnes Dunn, the prisoner
at the bar.

What more? — ** We had a notion of doing
him out in the demesne, but then we are so
well known in the nlace, that I Ihoueht as
how it was better to aefer it"— or— " refer it,"
I cannot exactly say which — " until I came
into town and consulted with some of the
city committee about it ; and so I came in nur-

EDseiy about it. I was telline the man of^the
ouse about it' He was telling me of the
meeting here, and he said, he would tell vou
of it himself, but he is so busy ; I saw he had
not time ; but I suppose my telline vou of it is
the same thing." At this part of the conver-
sation the man of the house came up to
where we sat—*' Well, says he to James Dunn,
the prisoner, " were you telling him ?" " I
was" — was James Dunn's reply. — ^ Well^
what do you think of it ?" t

Says who? — Maurice Dunn to me— '^la
it not a great thing ?" — I told him, I was but
onei I did not know what to say about it.

James Dunn was present at this? — ^He
was

What reply did he make ?— " What do you
think, if you mentioned it within ?"

Who said that? — Maurice Dunn.

Was James present ?— He was.

What more was said? — I asked where
James Dunn lived, was it far off— He told roe
just down at Luttrelstown — I then stood up,,
and I left the two Dunns toeether, and re-
turned into the room, where the meeting was
held.

What passed after you returned to the
meeting ? — I mentioned briefly to the mem-
hen the conversation that passed abroad.

Mr. JII^Ara/(y.— Do not mention any thing
that passed when Dunn was outskie.

Mr. Prime Serfeant.-^Vfva any question
put to you respecting James Dunn?— There
was.

Was he called into the meeting ?— He was.

What was the irst thing that passed upon
his introduction into the room?— Maurice
Dunn was called in before a word would be
heard from himiSiid Mtoriee Pima was asked

849]

to Murder Lord Car/tampion.

A. D. 1797.

[850

iki the presence of James Ounn, if he would
irouch (or him ; if he was np or ttraiekt, I do
ttot know, which ; he said, " he would engage
his life for him/' upon which certain signs
were put to him.

What signs P — Signs hy which the people
called United Irishmen were known to each
other at that time.

He was tried ?— He was.

Did he answer the signal ? — ^He did.

After he had proved himself, what passed ?
•—He was desired to sit down.

Who was chairman ? — ^I was chairman : I
again took the chair.

Having taken the chair, he so good as to
tell what passed ? — I then addressed James
Dunn the prisoner, and said, ** These gentle-
men wish to hear from yoor own mouth, what
you have heen telling me abroad.'* — " Why,
gentlemen," says he, '* what I was telling that
gentleman was, that I, and a few more friends
were thinking of doing out Carhamptou.'' He
was asked— '* Did he live under lord Car-
hampton f **— He said, he was his smith and
farrier.

Did he assign any motive for this inten-
tion^ what induced himf — He said pretty
much what he said to me abroad, '' That he
heard down at his side, that he was a great
hindrance to matters getting forward."

How was this proposal of his received at the
meeting ? — With much seeming satisfaction.

Do you recollect any particular expression ?
— I do.

Mention it ? — One said, " It was great news**
—another said, ** It was glorious news'* —
another said, <* It was the best news they heard
yet"— and one said, *' It would do more for
the cause, than had been done before."

Do you recollect, whether there was a man
of the name of Byrne at that meeting? —
There was.— There were two Byrnes at that
meeting — [Here thewitness pulled out a paper,
which he said was a list of the names of the
persons then present, and taken down at the
time.]'

Do you recollect any thing being observed
by any person of the name of Byrne ?— I do,
by Thomas Byrne. It was asked by Byrne,
*^ How could it be done?" He said—

Who said ? — ^The prisoner; that there was a
narrow part of the road leading to Luttrels-
town, where there was a quick-set hedge, and
a stone wall, and that from behind that would
be the place to slap at him.

Was there any time, or day, or particular
pointing out of the day, upon which it might
be done ?— The Sunday following was pointed
out, but not at that time.

Ten what passed?-— The prisoner, James
Dunn, was then asked, ** How lord Carhamp-
ton usually weht out ?" He said, he went ge-
nerally in a post-chaisfr— He was then askeq,
if many vent with him ? He said, none but
the ooy who drove him, to be sure; some-
times a footman went with him.— He was
tHert asked, " If he did not go anncd ?" He

VOL. XXVI.

said, he always carried pistols about him, and
was damned wary ; but what would signify his
pistols } one good blunderbuss would do as
much as ten.

Well, sir?— He was asked the hour he ge-
nerally went out. He said, sometimes sooner,
sometimes later, but he could not go in or out,
without his knowing it. He was then asked.
Why he did not go to some other place to pro-
pose this scheme ?-— lie said, the mati of the
house, or his wife, I do not know which, was
a relation of his, and he chose to come there .
as knowing it was the safest. He was then
asked, how many of his friends were in the
secret ? — He said four, whom he had engaged .
to join him . He was asked, if they were along
with him ? He said no, but if any time was
appoi'nted, he would bring them, for he had
nothing to do but slip out and fetch them.

Was there any time appointed for his bring-
ing them in? — ^Yes; seven o'clock in the
evening of the same day.

What was done after that appointment?—
It was then proposed that an oath of secrecy
should be taken by all then present, which
was accordingly done.

Court, — Do you recollect the purport of the
oath ?— To keep secret the matter then pro-
posed.

Mr. Prime Serjeant. -^VfhB.l farther passed?
—It was proposed, that the names should ail
be taken down, that we might know one an-
other. I took them down as they sat, or
stood, beginning with myself. Here they are
—[The witness then produced a list].

Mention their names ? — William Carrige,
Michael Farrell, Thomas Bourke, James Fair-
weather, John Taafe.

Court. — Is that the list you took at the
time ?— It is my lord. Matthew Lawler,
Patrick Hicky, /ames Bacon, George Ryan,
William Darcy, Garret Byrne, James Dunn,
Thomas Byrne, John Farrell, Patrick O'Neil,
John Whelan. — Them are all was at the meet-
ing in the morning

Court. — How many are there?— Sixteen,
besides myself.

Mr. Prime &r;ean/.— Was there any scheme
conceived of dividing or subdividing the party ?
•—It was proposed and agreed to, that a com-
mittee of seven of the memberb present should
be struck out to meet Dunn and his party in
the afternoon.

Was a committee struck out? — ^There was.

Name them? — I was first, William Carrige
second, James Fairweather, Patrick Hickey,
Garret Byrne, Thomas Byrne, and John
Farrell.

After the committee was stmck, was there
any sign, or word agreed upon ? — There was.

what was.it? — " A good act."

What was the effect of that word ?— That
the party might know one another when they
met.

After the committee was struck and the
pass word agreed upon, was there any time ,
appointed for meeting again i — Yes.

3 I

851]

37 GEORGE Iir.

Trial of James Dunn fir aontpiring

issa

What time ?— The same day at seven Id the
evening, at the same house.

Who were to meet P—rJames Dunn, and the
persons be was to bring, and the committee.

Be so good as to tell the Court and the jury,
aAer the meeting broke up, what you neit
did ? — I went home and determined with
myself immedisleljr to apprize lord Carhamp-
ton of what was ^oing forward ; and for that
purpose, I went m person to the Royal-hos-
pital, and not finding him at home, wrote a
letter, cautioning him not to go to Luttrelstown
oir Sundav, as was his custom, or to that
effect. I left the letter, and returned.

Coiirf.— Where did you leave the letter ? —
At the Royal-hospitaly the residence of lord
Carhampton.

Mr. Frime Serjeant. — You sud the commit-
tee were to meet at seven in the evening^;
tell the jury, what induced you to make this
immediate communication to lord Carhamp-
ton ? — ^To prevent the danger that was threat-
ened.

Did any thine pass from Dunn, which made
you do that? — Yes : Dunn said, it was lord
Carhampton*s custom to go to Luttrelstown on
Sundays, and near that would be the place to
do him, I apprehended, that he and his party
mij2:ht meet nim and destroy him ; theretore I
told lord Carhampton without waiting the re^
suit of ihe committee.

AX the hour of seven, was there any meet-
ing of the committee, or any part of it?—
There was ; I was first, William Carrige se-
cond; James Fairweather was there ; Garret
Byrne, Thomas Byrne, and John Farrell;
llickey did not attend.

All the committee, save him, attended? —
They did.

Did you see the prisoner that evening? —
I did.

Was he alone, or accompanied by any per-
son ?— He was accompanied by four persons.
' Name them? — As tney gave their names to
nr.e.^ they are as follows [lookine at a list.].

Court. — Did you ask them their names ? —
I did.tny lord— John Broderick, Peter Reilly,
Patrick Carty, and Edward Martin.

Mr. Prime Serjeant. — ^Then there were ele-
ven in all .?— There were.

Be so good as to mention what was next
done? — It was' then mentioned to those four
whom tbepHsoner had brought in, that an oath
of secrecy had been taken in the morning, and ,
it was necessary for them to do the like; which
they did.
• you were in a separate room ? — ^Yes.

Tell the Court and the jur^ what passed
afterwards — Did any conversation pass in the
presence of Dunn?— There did.

' Tell it ? — ^Thomas Byrne said, ** I suppose
those are friends, and gentlemen ; I suppose,
w« all understand, what we are met about ?''

Bid Dunn say any thing?— He saki, « If
they were not, I would not bring them here."
Bjfrne said, «« We know the busihess we have
iiiet about, had we' not Abetter proceed to

buttnessf Well, Mr. Dunn, let os hear how
you intend to do it ; what is your plan ?'' ' or
to that effect; I cannot exactly recollect the
words.

l^ell, sir?—'' The plan I had first a notioQ
of, *' says he, *' was in doing him out in the
demesne, but then as I mentioned this morn-
ing, th\it would be habte to danger; the
smallest noise would be heard, and he has a
parcel uf Highlanders there, and we thought
It best to defer it, til! we took better advice.''

Was there any obsietVjition upon that? —
There was; that his plan of doing him oui
upon the road was better, but it would be at-
tended with danger^ and be then proposed-^'

Who?— Thomas Bvrne— That the partj
should go out mounted— it would be the most
secure and safest method.

Was all this in th^ "presence of the prisoner ?
— It was. The plan was then agreed to. .

Was there any ^justment or settlement of
the business ?— There Was —At first, nine was
proposed to go out, of which I took a note
upon this paper in this manner, ** Nine num-
ber mounted."

Were the nine or any of them agreed u^n
at that time ? — ^No, Sir. It was thought ume
would be sufficient ; but John Farrell men-
tioned that no man then present should be
exempt, they should all go.

Was that agreed to?— It was.

Do you mean, that Dunn and his four men,
and the six of the committee should go ? —
I do.

Was there any time and what fixed for the
execution of this ' plan ?— The Sunday fol-
lowing.

Was there any and what reason assigned by
any and which of the party for fixing upon that
day? — It was mentioned bv Dunn, that it
could not be upon any other day ; that was lord
Carhamptun's usual day forjgome to Luttrels-
town, and they might be waiting long enough
upon week days— that he seldom or ever went
to Luttrelstown, but upon Sunday.

Was there any and what observation made
upon that proposal ? — It was then mentioned
by Thomas Byrne, that the sooner it was •
done the better, lest the matter should get
wind.

After this was asreed upop with resp(ect to
lord Carhampton, was there any sdieme con-
ceived, with respect to the persons whd might
be with him ?— They were to be assassinati^
— to be shot.

Who ?— The driver and the footman.

Was there wit,h respect to any other person ? .
— ^There was; in case he had any body with
him — all were to^ be done:

Was there any reason assigned fpr ti^g
off those persons ? — ^There was.

By whom ?— By James Dunn.

What was It?— He said that all lord Car-
hampton*8 servants knew hifii.

Was there any observation made af^
wards?— There was byThomais Bjwne^ and
others— Tbe^ hesitated upon it Qi»o

w3^ fo Murder Lord Carhampion*

thdiighVit a sin to put innoceDt men to' death
— ^DuDa ^d doing p( bin alene. would be
doing nbthinuzr-fbr we will all be discovered.

C^ftftfrr-Vroat do you mean by doing kirn f
—Shooting him.

J4r..Prw^ 5ei7ean/.*-T Was. there any obser-
▼atioh maae aderwarda? — It was then agreed
vpop,, that the whole should b^ done.

Do you recollect any oarticular ezprcssbn
made use of by any or the party— It was
agreed* sth'at the whole should be taken off?
— Itw^ . ...

L Whs^t ensaged your attention nest ? — ^The
manner of doing it.

..TeH th^ Court and the jurv, the manner in
which it was proposed tq be executed? — It
^ras proposed by Byrne and agreed to, that
three at |east should go out disguised with
loose coats' and blunderbusses, anothe rest as
yeom^ji cavalry, to be armed with pistols.

Court — ^Were the three' to be on foot ? —
No,. i|(iounied.

Mr. Prime iSer;eaii/.-AVhat part of the duty
were the. persons with blunderbusses to do ? —
l^ey were to corae at the back of the carriage
and to fire in-*-These with the pistols were
then to ride on and fire in atthe wmdows ; lest
ttict fire from behind should not have taken
effect, and as thjsy passed the footman and
pbstilion, they were also to dispatch them—
^^y were then to re-charge their pieces;
nde on in a body towards Dublin, and keep
together, so as to secure their retreat.

The oath of secrecy was taken at this meet-
ingl— It was.

Do you recollect any thing particular being
s^id by any of the party in the presence of
Dunn? — I recollect an expression of John
Farrell.

What was it?— When the book came to
bim, he said, '< If this business misses, if
provision be made for my family, I will under-
take to do him in the streets."
jAAer this was there any proposal, or inten-
tion to meet again ?— It was proposed, and
agreed to,, that the committee should meet
the Tuesday night following, at Dunn'y^ the
same house.

Were there any directions given to James
Dunn, the prisoner? — ^Therewere.

Mauric^ Dunn was not present at any meet-
ing but the first?— No; James Dunn was to
come oo Wednesday.

^ .For .what purpose was James Dunn to come
iiito town? — ^To receive communications from
Ib^ committee, and to communicate them to
his friehds in the country.

.Do vomecollect any thing being said by
anvorthc committee ?— I do.

«.What was it?— William Carrige said, he
cqul^ not attend, for he had nothinj; but his
bread to depend upon — ^Whereupon John Far-
rell^ Mid, be should not be in the business, if
b^ d[id not attend to it— for no man should bo
exen)i^;fibm a business of the kind— that no
business should be an excuse.

Had you any dnnk?^We had.

A, D. 1797.

[854'

Was there any enquiry made with regard to
arms ?— There was, by Thomas Byrne, who
asked, had anv of the party arms — Dunn, the
prisoner, said, his friend Reilly hid a verv good
blunderbuss — As for his part, he had kept
no arms lest he should be suspected since the
aflair of the Cormicks.

Had there been any mention of the Cormicks
in the communication with Dunn before ? —
There had— As it appeared to me, to give him-
self greater credit with the committee, he said,
he had planned the affair of the Cormicks.

Were you asked about your arms ?— I was.

What answer did you make ? — I said, I had
none, but I would try to procure some.

Did you make any attempt to procure any ?
—J di(f.

Whatpaased then?— Shall I tell where I
went to.

Do so ?— The following day I went to a
pawn-broker*s in Dorset-street for the purpose
of getting arms, to know whether he could
furnish me. He agreed, and told me, I could
have two or three blunderbusses and some
pistols.

How soon after the meeting did you see the
earl of Carhampton ?— Tluit night after I left
the meeting.

You attended the meeting on Tuesday with
the consent of lord Carhampton ? — I did.

How many of the committee met on Tues-
day ? — ^Tbree— I saw but three.

X ou mean three besides yourself? — ^Yes.

Who were they ?— Thomas Byrne, Garret
B} rue, and John Farrell.

Did Maurice Dunn appear at this meeting?
—He did.

Tell what part he took?— It was then sug-
gested by Maurice Dunn, that a business of
the kind could not be properly or cleverly car-
ried into effect without money.

What passed in consequence of that? — In
consequence of that, it was determined, that
I should go to the secretary of the meeting,
and acquaint him with their determination.
I went away, and instead of going to the se-
cretary's, I went home to bed.

This happened on Tuesday ? — ^Yes.

Did vou see the prisoner on Wednesday ?
— I did.

Wheref— At Maurice Dunn's in Strand *
street.

Did vou see Maurice Dunn ? — I did.

Did he say any thing? — Ha said, he heard
that Carhampton had received a letter upon
the business.

You saw the prisoner James Dunn ? — 1 did.

What passed ?— I asked him, if it was true,
that Carhampton had got a letter upon the
business as Maurice Dunn told me. He said it
was no such thing— that lord Carhampton had
taken up a man, but let him go afterwards as
he was mad.

Did Maurice Dunn hear this ? — He did.

Did he say any thine?— I do not recollect
that be did : He seemea to he satisfied.

Was there any talk about money in the pre-

855]

37 GEORGB III. Trial qf James Dunn Jet conspiring

[856

fence of the prisoner ?— There was : Maurice
Dunn told the prisoner he was going out
along with me to the secretary of the Baro-
nial, for the puspose of getting a supply of
money, and desired him to wait till ne re-
turned.

Was there any objection made to that by
the prisoner? — None that I could hear«

What was done in consequence of that ? —
Wc went away to the secretary of the Baro-
nial, and having communicated the business
to him, he said the treasurer was the proper
person to apply to.

Who was ne? — Thomas Bourke.

Had he been at the meeting ? — He was at
the first.

Did you goto him ?— We did.

Where? — ^To a house in Grafton -street
where we were directed, and where he did
business.

Whose house ? — Dignan*s I think.

What passed there ?^-Maurice Dunn and
he went into a small office in the shop and
communicated the matter.

Mr. Cttrran. — Was this in the presence of
the prisoner? — No it was not.

Mr. Cttrran.— Then, my lords, this is not
evidence.

Mr. Prime Serjeant, — My lords, I should
submit this is admissible evidence. Here it is
proved, there was a meeting and confederacy.
— ^Two of the conspirators went away de-
puted from the body — their acts are evidence
against the others.— But at present, I will not
press it. Did you see James Dunn the pri-
soner afterwards ?— I did.

After you bad been with Bourke?— Yes,
when I returned with Maurice Dunn.

What passed then?— He told me he must
come to town again, for we were not able to
effect the business.

Was there any particular time appointed
for his coming to town again? — I do not
recollect, but ne said in the course of Uie
week.

Did you see him again in the course of the
week ? — I did.

When ?— Either on Thursday or Friday, I
think on the Friday following.

Did any thing ^rticular occur between you
with respect to this matter at the next meet-
ing ?— I do not recollect that there did ; there
were other people present.

We have now gone through from the 7th
to the 14th. Do you recollect Sunday the 14th
of May ? — I do.

Did you see the prisoner James Dunn upon
thatday?— Idid.

Where? — At Maurice Dunn's house in
Strand-street on the morning of Sunday the
14th of May.

Did any conversation pass between the
prisoner and you, or in his presence with res-
pect to this business on that day ?— Nothing
but that the business had been deferred for
waht of money.

Whom was that with?- -With the pri-

soner James Dunn in Maurice Juan's pre-
sence.

James Eerrit cross-examined by Mr. Curran*,

Pray sir, what profession are you ?— An at-
torney, sir.

How long have you been an attorney? —
Since the year 1785, or 1786.

An attorney of repute I dare say you con**
sider yourself ?— I suppose so.

Of good character ?— I suppose so.

Of course, sir, I dare say you have never
been censured by any of the courts ? — I was,
for not attending pursuant to an order of the
Court.

It was not for any embezzlement of any
client's money ? — It was not.

Were you ever chareed with the offence or
embezzling your client smoney ? — I was chai^
ed with having kept money.

That you ought to have paid over ? — ^I do •
not say that.

In what cause was it ?— In Farrell and Kelly'
or Kelly and Farrell.

How comes it you do not speak exactlv ?
were you concerned for both? what was the
charge made a^inst you by Kelly? — Why,'
for keeping 14/. 15s. 9d , which I received
and refused to hand over to him, because he
would not make an affidavit of the debt being '
due to him.

Fromwhom did you receive that sum ? From
the defendant Farrell ?— Yes.

You say, that Farrell had paid you that sum
—1 do.

For Kelly's use ? — I suppose so, being the"
plaintiff.

Did you assign the reason of not paying the
money over ? — I did.

What was it ? — Because he would not make
an affidavit of the debt bein^ due.

Therefore you refused ? — 1 did.

Did you pay it back to Farrell the defend-
ant ? — No, I did not.

Do yon 'recollect an action of Farrell against
Kelly f — There was.

That was trover for 100/. ?— I believe so.

You were attorney in that? — ^No.

Who was ?— I believe a man of the name of
Hickson.

Did you act at all in it?— I did not.

Was the action instituted by your means?
—It was.

For whom ?— For Farrell.

What was the subject of the trover? was it
not a note which had been lost and advertised
—I know nothing of the advertisement, Kelly
said he lost the note.

Do you not believe, that the note was re-
turned by Farrell's wife?— I believe it.

Was not the 15/. alleged to be the balance
after paying the offered reward.^ — ^What re-
ward ?

There was a reward of 10/. for the return of '
the note, and another note was given for a
larger sum than that reward? I know no- ^
tlxiug of that

857]

io Murder Lord Carhamphn*

A. D. 1797.

[858

You have heard that ?— I did.

l>id you not bring an action by Kelly against
Farrell for that amount?— I do not know — he
6id not employ me.

The action was for 14/. ld«. 9d.? — ^I believe
so: 10/. as I heaf^ was the reward; the
rest was money advanced by Kelly's wife to
Farrell.

Did you not hear that the wife returned the
note for 100/ ?—I did.

Did you not bring an action afterwards
against Kelly for his own note ?— I do not
know thai the action was for the note.

It was in trover ?-^It was.

Did you issue the writ? — I did.

In whose name did you issue the writ?— In
the name of Hickson.

Who filled the writ?— I did.

Who out Hi6kson*s name to it?— I did,
with Hickson*s approbation previously bad.

The action was in Farreli's name against
Kcllv ?— Yes.

Was Kelly committed upon that writ ?— I
believe he was.

Was there any sum raid by KeUy to Farrell
in notes, or money ?— There were five notes
of 10/. each.

What was the value'of these?— I do not
know : I believe in part payment of the 100/.
debt

Did you draw any release upon that occa-
sion ?— I believe I did.

By virtue of your oath was not that a re-
lease of a threatened prosecution for a rape ? —
I heard nothing of that : I considered it a re-
lease of all civu actions.

Did you never hear anv thine of a threat of
a prosecution for a rape r — I did but I never
threatened him.

Then it was a release in full of all debts,
dues, rapes, and demands. — Did you consider
the rape as a sum of money ? — No.

By virtue of your oath had you heard of the
rape before you drew the release? — I believe
I aid.

Kelly was in custody for his own note of
100/.— I do not know that it was his own
note.

Was not the note claimed by Farrell as his
own property ? — It was.

A sum of 50/. was paid in notes? — There
was.

Kelly was in gaol at that time ?— Yes.

You gave a release for 100/. and the rape
was thrown in as a bargain ? — I knew nothing
of the rape.

There was some little talk about it ?— There
was.

How old was Kelly ? — ^I do not know.

Is he not a creature above 7Q years of age ?
No. 'k

IIow old do you think him now ? — About
60.

You do not believe him to* be more ? — ^No.

By virtue of your oath did you ever sweat,
that you knew nothing of the issuing of that
wrilf^Never.

And so having brought an action against
Kell^ for his own note, ne is put into gaol — a
rape is threatened— he eives 50/. in money —
vuu draw a release of lul actions— and he is
let out t — I heard he was.

Did you never swear you did not fill the
the action ? — ^No.

Who filled the notes ?— I did.

Who filled the release? — I believe I did.

Who witnessed itP — I believe I did.

It was upon that action you were attached?
— ^I believe it was.

It wasjpart of the order that you should be
struck offthe roll ? — It was part of the con-
ditional order.

And ^ou showed cause against that order,'
and set it aside? — ^No, I did not.

And you were considered as a respectable
attorney ? — ^You asked me my opinion and I
gave it to you.

Did you ever swear you were not concerned
in bringing that action ? — ^Never.

And you had Uickson*s consent? — I ap-
prized him of it, before I issued it.

I have a curiosity to know why your own
name was not used ?— I did not like to be con-
cerned for and against Kelly.

You had an objection, that it should be
known you were so concerned ? — That might
be a reason ; and I believe was.

Did you ever in any affidavit deny that you
knew of the arrest ?--No.

Did you ever swear you did not fill up the
notes ? — How could I swear that.

I know how you could swear it. — But I ask
you, did you swear it ?— No.

Did you ever deny the extortion of the 50/. -
—No.

I suppose the 100/. note was given up by
Kelly to Farrell in gaol ?— I know nothing
about that

Did you hear that Kelly gave it back to
Farrell?— I,did.

Did you ever deny by any affidavit, that
you knew of Hickson*s name being to the
writ?— I did.

Or that you gave directions to have the
writ issued ? — W here I issued the writ myself
there was no necessity to deny my giving di-
rections for it.

Did you ever call upon Hickson at all res-
pecting the writ ? — I did.

Did you ever deny that by any affidavit ?—
I did not.

Did you ever draw any information, or
examination respecting the rape, with inten«
tion to have it sworn? — I do not recollect I did.

It is very odd, you cannot be able to say '
whether you drew this examination, or not.
Where have you lived since ? Have you prac-
tised as an attorney since you were struck oflf?
—I have.

Have you taken any pains to conceal your«
self from any process of the courts? — Never.

Have you a family?— I have a wife.

You have supported yourself as an attorney
since that transaction ?— No,

859]! 87 GfiOKO]^ 11^.

When did ^oo tiecomk tf UfAted Vnih-^
manP— Some'drntfitithe month ofAyAVlksl.

I hope you think yourbelf ail honesl mitii?
-^I hope so.

By virtue of your <Mtb, did ^oiicohSTder
that you were eliteriiif iltd a[*juM' and ho-
nourable en^sement ? — Give' me tiine to re«
collect ; I wilfanswer ybti iullyahd fairly. I
did hot consider it either fak, or honourable
from what I' heard before of it.

Didyou bind yourself by lAty^soktrin'olith
to that en^gement ? — No.
• You to<Hc no otttb?--! rfeid af diklairktion
-^butto6k<no oath.

How came that? Is it usual? If is not
usual fot-ahy: man to enter without an oath f
— No ; but \ha pfc^son wh6 made nIeMid ' not
kAovf bow.

Yov enfeeredthat sodety u|)ofr ybtn* bonbof f
-^No ; but it was the bundling of* th^ man ;
lusDMue wl»Crat)6.' H6'is gone abiroad.

You areture cf that f — I do not sa^ that.'

You beliteve it f—I do.

Then we cannot coilfr6n<t him against you?
>4*I do notknow^ that-^I ' believe yon' can-
not.

Would you have tak^n the'olith, if it had
been tendered to you P — I would: I did not
think it valid or binding; of any unlawful
oath of the kind.

Then you wouM have taken that 't>ath? — I
considered it as a declaration.

You would have taken'it, hbwev^r solemn f
•^l would ; for the purpose of obtaining the'
information I wanted.

Then you took the oath, to inform govern-
ment of this design ?-->! dm not' take any
oath.

You would hiVe taken it?— I would that
kmdof oathybecauscrldo nbt'lbink it bind-
ing.

Do vou n6t think an- oath taken in ihe
King's bench is pretty bindin^-?-^! do-^be-
caibseevieryoalh there administered ^ is law-
fully administered.

And a man taking an oath there falsely de-
serves no credit ?— I think ' so .

It was therefore, I take for granted as a'
friend to the law and constitutkm of the coun-
try, you became a United Irishman to dis-
close their designs, if they were bad ? — I ad-
mit it; if I found thur designs to be bad, as I
did.

You acted from motives of loyalty ? — ^I did ;
iM found them acting against Che donstitution
of the country.

•Y<ni had heard a very bad character of them
b€ffbref->I heard their intentions wer6 not
goodi

Thin Was m April F^Yea:

Hdw soon «f^er did tou pefct^^te- theii^ de-
aths were bad ?— In about three weeks'! ob-
tatn«d theinformation I i^alhted.

•How long before the transaction yon gave
an account of ^--About a week.

Thwn yoa W€fre satisfied their desijgns Wcfc
bid ?-I was ; I had liadobbt^bout it.

TndI'dfJamAI)iiiin/(fr'consj)lring [8B0

How ^001) dibi^th^ plot was hatched, did
you see lord Garhampton ? — ^Tfaat' night. ^ .

That' was the first conference you had with
him ?— No; the day t>efore I saw bini for the
first llmtf.

You' are" ^ pure a' loyalist to etpect any
refwiard? — No,<and if itVere to do over againi
I would do it at the hazard of my oWn peir-
sbdal safety.'

You never were promised any rcwafd? —

1*0. ^

Yofd'never said that you were promised any
—Not that I recollect.

Are you not sure, that you ' never said you
w^re promised r — ^I do n6t i eboilect ': I do not
think I did.

Are you sure ? — ^I am pretty confident I didf
not.

Did you by Virtue of your oath ever say— j
whitt is^h^'nameof the man who says you
(fid ? — ^I do not know.

Do you know a man of the nime of Dug-
gfein?— Whoislie.

He viH be a witness against you — ^Did you
ev^r teH'any man of that name, that you
w^re'proniised bny picking in the ordnance?
—Never, upon my oath.

Pray, did you, or did yon 'not send the five
notes that are spoke of, for exebution, to Far-
rell?— Idid.

Now, iksk you, did you ever swear you did
not P-^I never did.

Pray, sir^ do you remember having been
concerned m a case of Farrell against Hanly ?
— ^No, it was a partner of mine of the name
of Lendrum, that was concerned.

Did ydxi ever draw an affidavit to set aside
an6hsuit?-^l did.

In whose name was it ? — Edward Smith.

Who'iigned'it? — I do not know; I drew
it at the rec^est of Edward Smith Farrell;
he told me/ it was for Edward Farrell, and he
took It away.' I do' not know who signed it,
o^ Whether it was' signed or not.

You are struck off the roll of the court of
KitigVbehch?— No ; I was suspended in the
citdicduer; it was -part 6f the conditional rule
to strike me off, but I understand tliat was
not done.

You are under censure ? — ^I was suspended
by the court of exchequer for preferring an.
appeal to the Lords in ordpr to serve my clients.

Had the celebrated Mr. Brodie any thing
to do with that ?— He bad and suffered very ,
justly ; he signed the petitioi^ of appeal, and
had a bond to indemnify himself. For that,
and ignoitmce of his profession, the present
chancellor stripped him of his gown.

He was your partner ? — ^No.

And you were stripped by thfc court of cx-
checjuer ? — ^No, I was suspended, for not at-
tending pursuant to order.

Look at that replevin : did you issue that f
—Never.

CoMf^.-^You were censured for preferring
an* appeal ?— No, my lord, for not attending
^n examination respecting that appeal/

^1}

to JHurdtr Lord Carhamfiq^^,

^. D* im.

[863

Mr. Cttrran,— Mention why you did qot at*
tend ?— I was a good ^eal alarmed at the timey
and was advised hot to atl^n^ : I was told the
Court would commit me to |th^ li^arshalseaj
and to avoid that, I aid not atiend.

A very eicellent reason? — Ig^veyoumy
reason.

Do you know a o^an of the ;i^me of Owen
Beilly of Barrack-street ? — ^^ do.

Did you ever procure any spirit license for
him ? — ^No: I was not in the hahit of pro*
curine licenses for any man.

Dia you ever produce any license to him as
having procured it for him?— Never; I was
concerned fpr liim as attorney.

Do you recollect having had a note in your
possession belonging to a man of the name of
Farrell ^-^I do.

Do you recollect havipg signed any indorse-
ment upon it ?— Never.

Whose note was it? — Cooney's note pay-
able to Sylvester Farrell, and no indorsement.

And you signed none? — N09 1 did not

You might have done it innocently?—- 1
might, but I did not.

What became of it?— I do not know.

You say that upon your oath ? — I gave it to
Edward Smith Farrell.

But what became of it since? — I know not

Where were you when the notes wf^re drawn
up ? — In GUes*8, Angel-alley.

The Earl of Ctfr^inpfon.^Examined by Mr.
Solicitor General,

Have you ever seen the prisoner, James
Dunn ?— I have.

How long have you known him ?— I have
known him a great number of years ; as well
as I recoUecti fourteen, or fifteen years at
least

Where has He lived latterly ?— In a house
of mine, close to my park-gate.

In what occupation ?— He has been my
smith, and farrier.

Your lordship passed frequently by him, sa
as to know his person perfectly? — Perfectly.

Pray, my lord, how soon afler his being
committed to prison did vpu see him ?^I was
present, when he was taken and committed.

'In whose compai^ iras he?— He was in
company with Patrick ' Carty, one of the
persons indicted for this offence.

Was he the man of whom the last witness
spoke?— He was.

What was he?— -He had been in my em-
ployment in the demesne of Luttrelstown,
aliqost from his infancy^

What induced your lordship^ or those acting
under you, to take thesemen?— When the
plan of assassinating me was origipalljr com-
municated to me by James Ferris, tlie witness,

whp has just quitted the table. ^I received

a Tetter from him on Sunday the 8th of May,
I thip]^ desiring me.4Pt to gq to XutjtrelMowo,
a^ w my cuatoD^— I. have, the letter in my

Mr. M^JJaHhf objected to the letter being
produced.

^. SoHcilior GeneraL—l h«ve asked his
brdsbip, how he came to arrest these prisoners ;
I am Qot deairing the letter to be produced, if
it l^e objected to; — but he savs, it was in con-
sequence of the conspiracy being communi-
cated tp him, that he had them arrested.

liOrd Carhompton. — If I had not received
the information I did from Ferris, I would
not have arrested Dunn or Carty; but I
thought it necessary to suggest at the same
tipe to the Court, that I bad the letter from
him.

You bad other conununications from him,
besides the letter ?— I had several : he at-
tended by my advice, and upon receiving iu-
fprmation, that I was to be assassinated upon
Sunday the Uth

[The counsel for the prisoner objected to
this evidence.]

Your brdship caused the prisoner to'be ar-
rested ?— On the very Sunday in the evening,
when I was to be assassinated, I was riding
with two aid-de-camps ; I discovered Dunn,
Carty, and others crossing the park ; one of
my aid- de-camps put spurs to his horse, and
galloped up ; he then made signs to me, that
those were the persons I was looking fer ; I
rode up, and caused them to be arrested.

Were James Dunn and Patrick Carty the
persons you were looking for in consequence
of the information you had received ? — ^They
were two of them.

Upon what day were they arrested ? — Upon
Sunday, the 14th of May.

They were accordingly committed to the
prison ? — ^They were.

Your lordship had occasion to visit them in.
the prison after?-*-! visited the prisoner at
the bar next morning, Monday, the 15th, io-
prison.

Did your lordship go unattended ?-^No: I
went with my aid-<le-camp, captain Eustace.

You had some conversation with the pri-
soner?— ^Ihad.

I ask your lordship, whether antecedent to,
or during the progress of the conversation,
you held out any hope, or terror, or intima-
tbn of either, towards the prisoner, in order
to induce him to say any thing to you ? — ^None
ait all.

Mr. M^Nalh,^-! ol^t to this evidenc^
and the ground of my objection is this : lord
Carhampton is a justice of the peace for the
county of Dublin^I desire to ask — Did your
lordship go as a magistrate to spmk to the
piMoner, upon the matter now in issue ?«-I
did not so as a. magistrate alall to him.

Mr. Sdlkkar Oenerul^-^li now a^ your,
Ipffdship to detail what passed between tlie
prisoner and you in prison?'— I went to Tisil,
the. prisoner at the miv, in some- measure wfthr'

in.theJMdgment of the C^ud»

pocket; whether I oughk.ip ttfjx to it^ I am a. hope that I might be able toobbin itifbrm-

ation, where! cpiild. take. Eeilly, Broderickv

J

8G3] 37 GEORGE III. Trinl ofJatm Dumf^ eomphinf [864

and Martin, against whom I bad itifbitnation
for the crime in question; and upon my
asking him some questions relative to Brode-
rick and Martin, I think he told me, that he
did not know. The first question that occurs
to me to have asked, was, what was become of
Martin, Broderick, and Reilly. He told me
he could not tell. I then told him, that con-
sidering the kindness I had shown him,
I little imagined he would be concerned in an
attempt upon my life. To my utter astonish-
ment, without any hesitation, he told me, that
be thought it was a good act ! — I was exceed-
ingly surprised at the candour of his answer,
and it induced me to ask him other questions.
I asked him, whether he himself had proposed
to murder me f He told me he had. I asked
him when it was, that he first formed that in-
tention f He told me, about Christmas last.
I remarked, that he had had several oppor-
tunities since that time, when I walkea by
myself in the park. He said, he had no per-
sonal dislike to me, and would never execute
it alone, but with his party. I asked him, if
he knew James Ferris f He told me he did.

That was the last witness ? — ^Yes ; I asked
him, if I had ever done him any injury ; he
said I never had ; but that he was sworn to
execute it, and if he were out of that, he
would execute it if he could. I then said to
him, though you misht think it a good act to
murder me, why would you shoot a poor inno-
cent postillion P " Why," said he, " to do the
thing completely.'' I told him he had very
little compassion upon his wretched wife and
family, who were starving. He said, the poor
woman knew nothing of the matter. I told
him, I had sent her half a guinea, for which
he said he returned me thanks. He said, he
never expected forgiveness; and that sur-
prised me.

Do you recollect what passed in the pre-
sence of lord Enniskillen?— I do.

Mention the occasion of his lordship being
there ?— When I quitted Dunn» I went into
town, and I mentioned those circumstances
which I have been now stating to the Court
to several persons of my acquamtance. The
i^ext day, on Tuesday, lord Enniskillen came
to me, and told me, he heard this story.

That is not evidence; but mention what
passed in the presence of the prisoner ?— I
took lord Enniskillen with me. Having
heard of the report in town, he said, he had a
curiosity to see such a monster as he heard
was in the gaol.

In consequence of that desire you went to
the gaol ?— I did, and told lord Enniskillen he
would hear it from his own mouth. I put the
same questions, and he answered very much
in the same manner he did the d^^ before.

If you had any other coramumcation with
turn, mention it?— Antecedent to this time,
the prisoner had been kept from seeing any
body, and I did deaire, at his request, that his
wife roi^ht be admitled to see nim; and on
Wednesday, I think the day after he had

made this candid recital, upon my asking him,
taking it for mnted he would not vary front
what he said the day before, he altered his
tone, and told me, he believed he was mad,
when he told me what he did, and would say
nothing more of the matter. I asked him»
whether he was prepared to deny all he had
said two days tocher ; he said, he was ; I
asked him, what made him alter his mind f
he said he did not know^ but supposed he
might be mad. At this time he was free to
walk about, and upon his coming up close to
me, and having expressed an alteration in his
mind, and not Uking his looks, and having
nothing but a switch of this size in my hand,
I bid him *' keep off, you scoundrel." And
the end of the switch being scraggy, tore hia
skin under the eye. When I spoke to him
before, I had pocket pistols for my defence in
my pocket, and my hand upon the cock, con-
cealed from bim. This day, I had not.

No kind of terror could have arisen in hia
mind from the apprehension of your having
pistols ? — On the contrary ; for I spoke kindly
to him, and ordered him porter.

He did not express any apprehension ?— No»
it appeared a sort of contrition. I forgot to
mention, when I went with lord Enniskillen,
Dunn was at prayers upon his knees, and
when we went m, he rose up, and made the
declarations I stated.

Carty was a labourer m your employment ^
—He was.

He was not in the room when this conver-
sation went on P— No, Dunn was aloAe.

I'he Earl of Carhampion cross-examined by
Mr. iPNally.

When your loitiship first went to this man,
you went accompanied by captain Eustace ? —
I was accompanied by captain Eustace the
first day he was put into prison.

When you had the conversation with tlie
prisoner, viras captain Eustace with you?-—
He was.

Was he armed ? — ^I believe not.

You were?— I had, as I generally have,
pistols in my pocket.

From the manner in which you appeared,
do you not think, the prisoner was aware you
were armed ?->-I believe be might.

He had been strictly confined, until in-
dulged by vour order? — ^He was in a cell;
they are called cells, but they arc rooms ii»
the nature of cells.

Was he bolted at the time ?— I ought to re-
collect that— I do declare it should have made
an impression upon me — I believe he had
irons on the first day.

If he had irons, they could not have coir-
tributed to the ease of his mind. How long*
had he been in custody f— Since the day
before.

Had he got food in that time T— He bad.

As soon as he was liberated from the irons,
hcdeiiiedwhathesaid?— Ko, sir. Imentim
it for the sake of the prisoner. Th« fint ^if

865]

t» Mwrder Lord Carhan^on,

A. D. 1797.

[86G

iroAt wdre fnil on him. On the Monday lie
was iVeed from the irons, and he had food by
him, when I went in, and he remained with-
out irons on Tuiesday, when he made the de-
clarations before lord Enniskillen. I now
say positively, he had irons on Sunday, which
were taken off on Monday.

CoBr^— Had you any reason to suppose,
when you had the conversation witn the
prisoner, that he knew you had pistols in your

rcket?— I am inclmed to think Dunn knew
never went without them. In order to
aatisfy your mind, that he rather conceived I
had arms, I do recollect, that'on the next
day, Tuesday he said, ^ Now, 1 have told you
the truth, I do not care how soon I die, you
may shoot me/'

Were any hopes held out, that he would not
be prosecuted ?•- -No.

Did you give him any manner of caution as
to the consequences? — ^No. I can assure
Tou, that when I asked him, how he could
have thought of murdering me, I did not
think he would have answered ; and when he
answered me, as he did, I was all astonish-
ment.

Mr. Solicitor General, — Carty was taken
prisoner with Dunn? — He was. I omit pur-
posely some of the conversation relating to
other matters, as I understand it is not proper
to mention it.

The Earl of Ennitkillen examined by Mr.

Towfuend,

Do you see James Dunn, the prisoner at
thebarP— Ido.

Have you ever seen him before? — I have.

Where P— I believe I have seen him at
Luitrelstown, but the first time I am certain
of having seen him was in the gaol at Kil-
mainham.

Upon what occasion ?««-Having the day
before Tuesday, the second day after Dunn
was taken, heard a good many of the circump
stances now related, they raised a curiosity in
sne— I went to breakfast with lord Carhamp-
ton, and expressed a wish to see the man,
who could be so ungrateful as to think of
murdering a man wiUi whom he had lived so
long. I went to the orison. The door of the
cell was opened— tne man was upon his
knees, and appeared to have been some time
so, fbr he rubbed bisknees— his stockings were
down, and the knees of his breeches open<-^
be appeared in a most devout posture.

Was there any conversation? — Xiord Car-
hampton asked, had he got the refreshment
he sent him?— He said, he had, but had some
of his own. Lord Carhamptqn than asked,
** What induced you to think of murdering me
—what harm did I do you ?''-rr'* For the fpod
of the party ."^<< What harm did the postilion
do^ott??--^None; butthatwemigntdothe
huuness completely.''

Can you recollect any thing farther? —
Lwd CirhMQpKm asked h\m, where it was
tii€gr*^iateoded to mtirdor him. He sud on the

VOh, XKVI.

road goine to Luttrelstown. He then ap-
proached lord Carhampton, with his arms
folded — *^ And, mv lord, if it were to do sfain,
I would do it; it was for the good of the
cause; I have not altered my opinion/'—
Lord Carhampton said, he had many oppor-
tunities, knowing he walked alone in the de-
mesne—'' No," said Dunn, ** I would have
attacked you with my party, for the good of
my party, but not alone."

You could see him accurately? — I was
within eighteen inches of him, looking with
astonishment

Did he appear to be influenced by hope or
fear ?«— Not at all. He seemed quite resigned,
as if making his peace by his pravers. He
said, ** I am ready to die immediately ; I care
not how soon I die."

Was there any other person present ?— Cap-
tain Eustace was at the door, and the under-
gaoler.

•

The Earl ofEnniikiUen cross-examined by

Mr. Greene.

Before lord Carhampton and you had any.
conversation as to toe alleged conspiracy,
they conversed with respect to some refresh-
ment?—Just as we came in lord Carhamp-
ton asked, ^ Have you cot the refreshment I
sent ?" The other said, ne had.

He knew of lord Carhampton's intention to
send them ?— I suppose he might have known
it : he acknowledged he recdved them.

Did the conduct of lord Carhampton ma-
nifest a disposition to lenity ?— Certainly, and
it surprisea me ; for I would not have done it
with any man who conspired aeainst my life.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL^-My lords, the other
witnesses, who were present at these declara-
tions, are in court, but we think it unneces-
sary to examine them. If the prisoner's coun-
sel wish, they may examine them.

Cburli.— Prisoner, nbw is your time to make

your defence.
PritofMT.— Lord Carhampton thrust me in

the eye on Monday, not on Tuesday, as he
said; what happened afterwards I cannot
say ; I was notin my reason for a few days at
that time. •

Lord Carhampton.^lt was not on Monday
I (truck you with the switch.

Evidence foe the Prisonee.

T%omat Carey examined by Mr. Curran.

Are you an officer of the court of King's
Bench?— Yes.

What papers are those in your hands?—
Three affidavits. .

Did you find them among the records of the
court?— Yes.

You found them in the place where affi-
davits are usually filed?— Yes.

Jo*n Hfcfcioii examined by Mr. Cttrran. '

Ypu are an attorney P— Yes.
Of what court ?— King's Bencb| Exchequer^
and Common Pleas.
SK

367] 37 QfiOJlQ^ UI. Tml ^Jamn IhmMjkr umpiring

Yqu know Jainet F^rn^^r^-Yes.

H»ye you ever sfcen him writ,^? — Y^.

Look ^X (hi^t [sW^wiqg bim one of the (^(fi*
daviu with the s^gpatuoe, *< Jamet* Ferru^"] 9
—I believe thi^t t^ lie lifi hjMid-nrritipg.

Did y<Mi giye TerfisAuthoTity or penni^ioa
lo is6ue %^y writ U) your name la the cause of
f ^rrell %gamit K^lb?— I did not: If you'U
liQt 190 expl^iji viyself about ii, I wilL He %fr
plied to me in a cause of Kelly egW3t Fajh
r^l, ^iid mmj9fM in«i li^ dmw a notice Qf haJl,
^hiich I did. Ii(e ciiQie htd^. mne tipe after

with an affidavit for a writ ; I re^d il» and said
4l^ wf3 fiQ en^trao^roi^ thiPfi you wMit to. be
eoo^emeds^iostyoMv qwA fluent I gave
him poaitive. directipi^ 90^ Ip imX mji oame
IQ apywrit
[Here the affidavit proved by HieksoB vas

read: i| fpmMqd IQ have been iwom

l)e^ Mr. /wtice ChMihedMn» si^aed

James Ferris, in which he denied seve-
ral chaim made itfstin^l hin^, in the

cause or TVirrell v. l^elly. He dented,

that he knew any thmg of the issuing

of ike vrli ajjainet Kell;^ or that Kelly

vfas arrest, or of drawiae Ihe five ten

pound notes, oc that Kelmew of Hiek-

son's name beitt|^ signed to the wtii-or

thai he ever applied to Hickson.}

Sdwar4 SfnUh F^mU exawiaed \kj |fr.

Do you know James Ferrjs 9— •! do.

When did you fivst become acquainted with
him ?— In brmgtng an action against a man &[
the name of Hanly.— I became acquainted
wMi him in the baltof the eld Four Courts.
Miles Moraa was original^ employedv and
¥erris told roe, Moran was not going on pro-
-perly, and woukl not bring the matter to
«sue; I gave hiin and Lendnun power to
chaneethe attorney.

Did they carvy on the business for you?—
Lendrum did ; they dissolved the partnersbii.

Wkait waa the event of the suitr— I was
nonsuited.

Was any aAdavtl made tp^ set aside tlMt
aoQsultr— There wasytp invalidate the teeti-
mpny of one Hanly .

bi what na«ie dnd the nflWavk purport to
bef^Edward Smith, whom Fen« saidJie
knew.

Did yoju see any person sign thiit affidavit?
—I saw Ferris sign the name of EoMid

Was it ever filed?— Qe told me it was filed,
and I served e ik)tiee at his de^ upon the
opposite party.

Was that i^otioB madeN-N^.

Whv?— I thought froin every appearanoe

Do you recollect a promissoiy note of John
Coopao, of Jft^Hympi;^ Su»tfM^iT-l^^^

For what sum'?— 67/. 10#. 4d.

To whom was it pftyable?— To SylTttsOer
FaueU of Little Bribhi^treet ; FeffilgaVb it
me to sell it. •

[MB

Did he do eny thiog to it ?<— He p«t tbe^
name of SyKeater Fa^eli upon it I hawe th«
note.

By virtue of your oath, who wrote the namft
of Siylveeter FamU upon the back of that aotef
•prJem^s Ferris.

You swear that?— I do.

You are at piesent confined in the Maiahal-
see ?— Yes«

For what debt lt-f«)/. the costs of the ne»
stdtinthatcauBCL

You have heard of a caine ef Farrell awssl
EeDy ?--«Yes, fu I have been implicateqia.itb

Do you know Owen RcUy of Baaraafa*
street ?'^I do.

In what sityatiea ia he f — He keeps a pelH
lie-house.

Dayou fecoUBCjt way penoOy aad wfaem,
fill ins a spirit licence for aim ?-^I caoaottell
whemeitwaaaapirit licence or not; U was
a paper to get a licence by. Ferris bseugkl
him taa piMc house at the back of the feu^
Ceuit% andfiUed it.

Was these apy aama to it ?— No-»I had aD
order of the court ef conscience with sir WiU
liam Worthington*s name, and Ferris toak it
ipom me» and< desired us to eo out until he
wfote the naiae ; we retumM, and saw thf
name written to the paper ; the ink not dni
B^ily waa to awcar to il» «id be got the «»
cence, it was so well done<

$U ^illi^ >V9i:thington was not there f*^
Nt).

You have seen Ferris in the Blarsha]ea
ainceN-^o; I have seen him in the Sheriff^s
prison.

What oonveraatien had he there with you ?
-w-He haddifiierent ones.

What convemtion had he in March last
about makiog a man of you ?-«-He alluded to
a thing of the kind. I said, it was a critical
businm, and I had no friend to extricate me.
He said he vrould make a United Iiish-
■ao of me, and if I would assist him in a
fuUy he weiddput me beside shoe-making bit*
a|nes8. I said, is was a haiaidous business^
aisd sueh a paltmight leave me under an ohr
lig^tion of quitting the kingdomi or get myself
mikdered*

He was to mako a United Irishman of
you)«-I did not understand much about it^
and did not like talking of it to him.

is Ferris a man of good leputatioiH-to be
-believed upon his oath?— No.

J^d^Bqrd SmUh Farrell cross-examined by Mt.
Attorney General,

You are fidward Smith Farrell ^— Y«s.
. And you are to take away the oredH ef
lewis P— No.

What else brought you here F^To tell the
knowledge I had S him.

And t&t iN, that he is not to be believed f

—I think he is not.
Voin' wci^e^ioniulted ?— I was.
And yon wanted lo set that aside?— Yes.
And It was neoessary to makraji aiMiiit^

—So he told me.

w0 M&fwh^ JLtfML CilVmW^fMia

tW]

An ftffidctilMtt8toMili|li^ l«d the
4avit «I0 to be ewoiti by Edward Smkb ?-'-
veSa

• AmI it wts prepsrad^ sod ]fOQ ttood bj, ind
•ttw ¥Writ put Iheaame BdwildfiAlith to \hk
sMhvit?_Idid.

And withottl ever being elPifcu by Ed^rerd
fintlhy or any odier perem, hivM tt> b^ mads
ett^ of lb aet aside the aoiiaiHt^ and joa stood
% andaaw it done f— 4 did.

Was act that a wicked traMScliob, as <vob
anintbeprsaetioeofGodf-i^ikaeWno be^
tec, as be adtised ma.

Yaa knew no better; to tee in affidavit
dnKwn up and signed b J a name ofapenoh
9flk> did netafmar^ and it Iras to be madensa
«f is a eoiirt or justioe. Do jin mean to say

h. 0. i191i

![&?«

«du sae so igaorantyOrBOwiekedyaa not to
know it was a fraud, or to disnigardit ^^^ did
al l»F bis advice.

Were yott so ^nonuit or ao ireak as not to
iaKm,tnat it was not aiair transaclion?-«-^By
ttaa's sense would teU bim it iras not faiiv
and that was the reason I did nbtpiboeedfittk
ther upon it.

Was it because you thought it t»^h>h^, or
were told it was improper f-*-I thought it
<iApOuldbeofiiouse.

Yoii said upon your direct aatninaliDn.
Ahat you were told it would nbtanbwer;
nal that the reason ?'**^o| i thought
inoreofit

Your name is Edward Smith?— My name
IsEdWard Smith Farrell. I signed a note
fidward South Farrell to make a distinctida
lietwten others, which were signed by Ed-
ward Farrrii.

Why did you sign Smith f-^Because my
mother's nanle is Smith, atad to diake a dia-
tfaictbn.

There was apromissory note you ssj dmwii
In fiurour of Sylvester Farrell ?— Yes. Fcrrib
desired me to go to the drawer of it, and I
^NhiM get twenb guineas, that I should have
too, and he -would nave ten more.

You took the note upon thoae terms f *«-*Yes,
but I did not go; it shows I hsd no design, or
i would have gnae to the drawer.

Why not give it to Sylvester FatieU?*^
did not see hun.

Did you ever look ibr him r-^I was to hold
Hforlum.

Did you look upon it as an honest transact
lion }— >No, I did not

Where does Sylvester Farrell livef«^4
Icem a tea4ion8e in DrumcondraL

Howbng are you in the MarshalaeaN^
Since the 18th of Fcbmary last,

And James Ferris applied to you to beooase
a United Irishman, when was that f^ln
the ktlet end of Febtuaiy or bsgianinfl of
March. ^ -^ a

You are m the Foor Coarts Matshalste ^^^
iam.

When were you lemoved from the SherHPt
prison f—On the eth of May.
What ifidferri8apphrlayoiiferi*-.To be

>a assistance to him,

What did ha Si^?^He toM me I had an
opportunity of making my fortune, and pOi
ine pM enoMiakidg. I asked what were
the means be had ; he said he bad a pall
that I wa9 not up to. I asked him what it
Was. fie hesitatisd, and then said, you ait a
blabbering tort of a fellow. I sda, no^ that \
had stuck to hiin. He said, there are great
tuihs of tnotiey to be had.

Your objiection was, that you had no friends
to extricate you?— Tes.

If j^b'u had friends to extricate you, you
Wobld haVe agreed^— No, I would not

Ydu wbre true to him tUl that time, alt
though you saw a &be name put to an affi*
dati^ ^d IttW a name put to a note, and you
were true to him: and would become a
United Irisharisii if you had a irieikd to exB-
oOe you from the ^loi(^ ?— No^ Sir, I gav^
you my reasons, and eacellent ones they
Ireidk

You were faithful to this man down to lh«
alOBth of Mkreh; Had yau any qoarrel with
him ?^Nt>.

4 Have you had any oomaunicitftsii with
him } — ^No, I could not visit him> atad he was
|lotkind«noiitth to vis^ me.

Tbitt v^xea yduf—No,I Oioughttiie 9h*
sence waaM be betttroh my side.
. You look Upon hiiti ab a vek;y bad fellow f
^i-I do s aiid myself as bad for knowing him*

Did you ever wnte to him ?«— I did.

You saul you had no commankatioti #ilh
himP^i wrote a bit of a noteto him. His
father brought me a bit of a notb, and I sent
word by the filther to bay shoes from me, if
he ttanted them ; to take three pair of shoes,
aod pi^ a aulnes for tfaeln^ as I looked upan
blnl to be nill of money.

Was the guinea to b^ paid befbrfe the shoes
.ware mader<«-No : if he had sisnt the order,
I would have made the shoes. When I got
no answer, I sent the maid wi^ anottiernote.

You were upon jmod term! with him then }
-^And I am sostiu.

Is that nalne, Sylvester Farrell, Ferris's
uMd writing f— No, he made Uiree or four of-
lers before he hit Off this: he had a paper
with the name of ^vester Farrell upon it.

What was that you said of Reily, was that
before or after the nonsuit ?— You put me to
a stand; I cannot recolleet.

Was it before or after the indorsemaUt upon
the note f-*-I tannot say.

Then you were upon fHendly tdtttto with
khn, and are so still ?-^No> the bands are
br6ke.

Were you ever in the gaol of NeWgalb ?— I

Who sware the idBdavift of Edwiild Smith \
•-•I cannot say.

Is it upon the file ?^He tdd me it t^as/and
asked me didl think he would tell a lie.

Whose note is this ?— It is ttii&e.

No, not yoitft, it belongs to Sylvester Far-
rell ?wi Yes.

ttow ]0ng have you hid ft in your posses*
uon?— Since March.

871]

37 GEORGE IIL

Trial of Jama Dunn for uat^piring

t8T«

And you never sent iir«-NOy I could not

go-
But you had a mode of sendiag }'^1 did not

know where he lived.

[Hero the counsel for the prisoner produced
a note, which the witness swore he believed
to be Ferris's writing, and which the witness
said was brought to him bv an apprentice boy
of one Haniy, a tulor in Thomas-street.
' The note was read, vh.

<' Mr. Ferris requests to know from Mr.
Edward Smith Farrell, if the affidavit of Ed*
ward Smith be in F.'s hand-vmriting, as an in-
dictment for personating another man may
be preferred against him at the next commis-
sion."]

Mr. Attorney Oineral, — When were you
first applied td for your evidence upon this
trial ?— Last Saturday.

You were not applied to in July?^Noy I
was not.

Did. you h^ar.that James Dunn made
an affidavit to put ofif his Uial last July?-— I
know nothing of any of the persons sworn
against; I never saw Dunn.

I did not ask you ; but whether you heard,
that an affidavit was sworn ?«*No, I did not.

Who told the friends of Dunn, that you re-
ceived that note P— I showed it to Cronyn,
apd several in the Marshalsea. He said, do
not write to the villain; he wants something
under your hand.

Mr, Ctcrrffn.— My lords, I am aware that I
am not entitled to speak to the evidence, but
I beg leave merely to suggest one point to
your lordships— It is this : putting out of the
case altogether the {testimony of Ferris, con-
tradicted as he is, the case would be confined
to the testimony of lords Qirhampton and
Enniskillen of the declarations of the prisoner,
which. evidence does not support the present
indictment for the particular conspiracy therein
described, any thing said by the prisoner,
with allusion to what was mentioned by Fer-
ris, can receive no illustration from it. Any
general admission of an intention to muider
made by. the prisoner with a mind ever so
clear and unbiassed cannot be illustrated by
Ferris's testimony, if that be put out of the
case. The prisoner may have nad an inten-
tion to murder, that may appear by his own
declaration: but yet that will not support the
present indictment, because to support it,
there 'must be evidence of a conspinnjg and
confederating with the persons named m the
indictment, of which there is no evidence be-
yond the testimony of Ferris.

Mr. Prime Serjednti-^My lords, it is not
mv intention to avail myself of mj right to
address the jury upon this case.

Mr. Justice Bcn^ </.-^ent]emen*of the Jury ;
the prisoner is indicted,' for tfauat he with
others, being evil disposed and designing per-
sons, on the 7th of May, in the S7th year of
the king, wilfully, maliciously, and feloniously
did conspire aod confederate together, of their

malice prepensed, to kill and murder the earl
of Carnampton. Gentlemen, the attorney*

ginecal did very properly state, that by. our
w, conspiracies to murder w«e capiul of>
fences, nut after some time, it ceased to be
capita], and became a misdemeanor. But a
modem statute has made the combinins and
confederating together to commit a murder, a
capital ofience^ and it is determined by the
highest authority^ that the very agreeing jto
do the act is the crime, and that it is not ne-
cessary to prove an overt act in consequence
of that ajgreement as ia case of treason. The
words ofthe statute: are, combining, confe-
derating and agreeing together, &c. There*
fore the agreeing to do the act constitutes the
crime, although no act be done in consequence
of it ; and it is not necessary for a pitiseculor
to prove an overt act.

Gentlemen, there are a number of persona
indicted for this ofibnce. The only one for
TOUT consideration now, is the prisoner at the
bar. To prove this conspiracy, the first mU
ness produced was James Ferris.

[Here the learned judge recapitulated the
testimony of Ferris.]

Gentlemen, the cross-eiamtnationof this
witness went to show, that he does not de-
serve credit. The fiict of his saying, that he
issued the writ with Hiclcsoa's perniissioA
is material, because Hickson positively d^
niea it.

I am to observe to you, that if you do not
think the testimony of Ferris is supported by
the testimony of lords Carhampton and £i^
niskillen, their testimony fails, because the
confession of the prisoner does not fp to
prove the identiod conspiracy laid in this in-
dictment. If you believe Ferris, and think
him supported by the evidence of lords Car-
hampton and Enniskillen, you will then find
the prisoner guilty.

Gentlemen, Thomas Carey was produeedL
[The learned judge then stated the affidavit
and subsequent evidence.] These, g«ntlemeny
are the fkcts to discredit Ferris : ne gave a
long history of the proceedings. Truit he
attended these meetings is to be taken as
true, as he gave information by letter to loru
Carhampton, which was proved. That to be
sure is a mere assertion of his own, but in
consequence of it the prisoners were appr^
bended, and Ferris did not know the prisoner
till he joined the society, and the prisoner
admitted he knew Ferris. The testimony of
Farrel, which went to impeach Ferris, shows
him to be a participator in every guilty act,
which he imputed to Ferris.

Gentlemen, much depends upon the credit
of Ferris : if his doubtful testimony be set vp
by the evidence given by lord CarhampUm
and Enniskillen, that goes to esti^ish the
conspiracy in the indictment. But if you d^
not believe him, tiieir evidence is not suffi-
cient to support this indictment.

Mr« Justice J>0iMiei.^Gentkm«ii of the

873]

lo Mmrder Lord Cathmifdmt.

A. D. 1797.

[874

Jury; I iniitliiMifce»flBWoli0ertatloiistoyoii
upon ihe most important duty, which you
iiave to pedbrm.. The prisoner is indicted
upon a statute^ making conspiracy for murder*
• capital o£feoce. Gentlemen^ I need not
.tell ^rou, thai it calls for particular caution in
.fonning your Terdicti where the consequence
: affects the life .of the prisoner. At the same
time I should hope tint caution would appl^
Jn eveiy case, lei the consequence be what it
may.

A conspiracy of the most' abominable and

dark nature is related to you by Ferris. I

' shall not go through aU the particulars ; it is

enoueh to say, that if he obtains credit from

. youy he has stated a most abominable conspi*

HMnr, such as this (statute meant to punish,

and has brought home to theprisoneri the

deliberately purposkig to commit a murder,

.attending at two or three times, proposing his

plan, hearing objections to it, and adopting

*«nother proposed by some members of the

. meettog. A plan, the more extraordinary, as

not founded m private malice towards the

person conspired asainst. But it is made the

.more alarming and astonishing, as it is made,

: iff. you beheve.the witness, in pursuance of a

phm by*« party, rejoicing in tne scheme, as

-one. of the greatest benefits which could

.accrue to their cause.

' Such, gentlemen, is the charge, and if you
believe Ferris, it is fairly and fully brought
liome to the prisoner.

The credit of Ferris is attacked, in my ap-
prehension very powerfully ; first by the tes-
■timony of Hickson, then by the testimony of
.FarreU; and by a comparison between his
own testimony and. his affidavit formerly
.sworn.

. Xyentleroen, I must observe, that the paiti-
cular facts, which form the ground upon
•which his credit b impeached, luive no direct
reference to the case before you. Those facts
.were examined to, in order to show, from the
mouth of Ferris himself, that he is a man of
such conduct as renders him undeserving of
credit. This thev endeavour to show from
hb own mouth by what he swore upon a
former occasion, and by the testimony of
others.

As to Hickson, his evidence b confined to
the simple fact, whether he had ; given autho-
rity in a particular cause to issue a writ, which
authority Ferris swears positively he had. In
.that fact, Hickson flatly contradicta him, for
be says, he positively forbid him to use hb
name.

With rettrd to Farrell, it has been obser-
ved by my otother Boyd, and I concur in the
observation, \hat in every act in which he
delineates Ferris, he is a participator of the
l^inlt, if you b^ave him. But upon the exa*
jnination, Ferris*f accountof himself puts him
in no favourable point of view. Indeed, you
jnuat not expect a witness from such a conspi-
racy abova all exception. Ha appears to be ^
Vnctiaiagattor^ey of ad Mr «hancter|aoting

for both parties in a suit, and raspetided by
one of the courts, for refusing to obey the'ur
order. Thus he represents hunself.

But I have said supposing the conspiracy
to be true, you cannot expect an account of
it from a man. against whom it would ba
impossible to allege an objectiop. If you be-
lieve the witness, be has fully established the
fact. Gentlemen, there has been evidence
laid before you, deserving your most serious
attention : you ate to consider whether that
evidence has made the account given by Ferris
receive your implicit credit : I mean the testi-
mony of lords Carhampton and Enniskillen :
whether that evidence has made you behev^
without any rational doubt, that the account
given hjT Ferris b true; because you must
adopt the trotii of that story told you by
Ferris, where his credit appears in no favour-
able light, contradicted by himself, bv Hickson
and by his own former affidavits, all going to
impeach his credit. But however if after the
account g^ven by those two other witnesses
you credit the account given bv Ferris, there
18 a case upon whith you should find the nri«
soner guilty. For, as my brother .Bwd has
stated, you must believe, tliat Ferris told conl-
plete and perfect truth, or in my apprehension,
the evidence, supposing his tesUmony out of
the case, win not go to support the conspiracy
in this indictment ; because it is an u»icu
ment for a conspiracy to murder the noble lord,
at a certoin time, by certain persons named in
the indictment, the knowledge of which cir-
cumstances comes alone from Ferris.

If his account be troe, it establishes the
indictment If, I say, notwithstanding tiia
impeachment of hb testimony, you take it to
be true, the case, in my apprehension, is esta-
blished against the prisoner. ^

I still must remind you, gentlemen, that m
all cases of credit, it is not for us to give any
opinion. It is fur you alone to determine.
We lay beforo you such observations as oocuf
to us. But it is for you aldne finally to decide.

As to the evidence, I have already stated.
What has been given. It is not necessary to
go minutely through it. I have in general
alluded to the objections to the credit of the
witness. •

But the case on the part of the crown does
not rest upon the testimony of Ferris, with
respect to the whole of the fiu:t, though I
again repeat, that you must believe that ac-
count before you can convict

You have the evidence of lord Carhampton
stating an admbsion from the prisoner^!
mouth. Thb b evidence always to be re-
ceived with caution. There b no manner of
doubt, that the dedarations, the expressions
of a man accused may be brought in evidence
against him. But it b always necessary to
examine in what manner those expressions
were uttered ; and how they were induced,
and whether any pains were taken to procure
them from the pnsoner. - '

GenU««en^ ) will sUts to you, wbst I take

875:i

S7 OBOROE UI.

TfM ^Jkmei Ih^Jhir MUfbing

t87fi

to bo hw without ui j mbaej' of qUMtiod.
TiieTvIe of law is drawn from a wise ooiisider>
ation of the criiae^ awl an imfjiression of the
TaridoB fisctSk I take the law to be as laid
down and the reason af it giren in a book
whith I shall read to you.

^ The huqan mind," saja the law book,
^ under the presBure of calamity is easily se-
daced| and is liable in the alarm of danger to
acknowledge indiscriminately a fiUsehoSd ot
a ttuth, as different agitations may preraiL
A confession therefore whether madb upoh an
ei&cial etamination, or in disoourBe with pri-
vate persons, which is obtained ftota a den»>
dant either by the flattery of hone^ or by the
impressions of fear, however slightly the ettv-
tions may be implanted, b not ndiaissible
evidence.''* I take that to be dear and un<-
doobled law. Where the dechwations of a
nris^Ber are to be given in evidence against
mm, the Court in the first instonoe is to see
wider what circumstances audi evidence
comes before them s and if they eee in the
introductory teotimoiqr of the witness, that he
held out hopesor fears; that he threatened
the (Muty, or gave hopes of pardon to induce
the confession, if any things I say, of that
aort apfNBars, it will bo the duty of the Court
to slop it altogether.

Accordingly in this caso^inquifv was made^
and krd Carhampton said, he bold out oeitber
hopes, nor fears. That being the case, it was
the duty of the Court to receive that evidencm.
We were bound not(to stop thai evidenoa
from going to you ; but to leave it to yon to
determine what weight it ahouki have m Well
with respect to the credit of the fint witness^
as other parts of the case. From the whole
«f the transaction, and fh>m the manner in
which the words were uttered by the ptiscmeiv
as brought in evklence before you, vouare to
judge, whether k>rd Carhampton hod out suck
nopes» or fears, as inducea this confession*
If m fact he did, then you are to discard that
octtfetoion. But if he did not, then you will
judge what the effect of the confession b.

Lord Carhsmpton toldyou^ he went bol to
iMk the prisoner any thing respecting hkneelf,
but with respect to others, and the qtwMion
he put seems to go no farther : he arimd,
wfa«re these mftn were? The nrisoncr re-
fined to give any informatioo, and having re*
ftised to make the slightest disclosure, lord
Carhampton aavs, ** I httle thoueht you would
have attempted to murder me :^ and he said
it waoan exclamation that broke ftom him in
wonder and astonishment, that the prisoner
should have undertaken so abominable a
iBurdor. Upon this^ you find Uie man, who
had refused to disdose any thit^ respecting
others, Iraakly stating his own ^t« oteting
hb motiveo,.iiot from any peiBonal cfl{|setio%

♦r-

■li. 1^

>mmm

^m

« Hawk. P.C.hb. S» d«46, i. SitaiMtfif.
See|too theoutoiQiag upof kwd eUef Justko
Em m the case ofCrossfioMi p. 916 ^f thio
VMasio* • ' *

but as he say% ftr tfai goad of the f*t|ri and
this adndsston oomes iiom a priooneivfefiising
to disdost wd^ thing, tespeotilig any other
person.

Gentleiaen» we find, uccordmc to the testi-
mony of lords Carhampton andBnuiskilleu,
that the prisoiBi. not only upso that ocaaioil,
but uaon the fbinwing miy, in the prtsenee
of brd Enniakillen^ i^ion the ^instion beinfe
put to liitn» wre dirsatlt tfaa sane acooun^
as he did the nrs^ day to lord Carhampton* .

LoKICofhatapton then g^ilirootioas, that
the prisoner's wife ehduld be admitted to aea
him. It seems that before that sfaft wib ea»
duded. After thisi tijion Wednesday, knd
Carham|Mna gpel agun, and then you find.
that the priaoaer.flatiif demed all be had mai
before allegm ko waa tnad whdn be said
whathedid. He wea asked, wn he proflaivi
to deny aU he hvi said, he said he wa% and
he relused to soy migr thing ittora

GentloBlen^ when Ike oonfossionB of m aarlgr
aregiven in evidenos, it io a sbund nue to
carry them no forther than the ehfkessi^ns in
whidithey arettiado naturally oonvey; and
upon these dedaations ao sworn to by kovda
Carhamplon and Bnniskillea, yon find the
prisoner eapreas a detemination to deoliu|r
the ji(d>le lord, atoting that it is not for any
particular enmi^, but finr the benefit of n
nartv; that he wteiU not take the advantages
ne had fimn tiom to time, hecaase he would
not do it alone, but only with a party, and for
the benefit of kpm|y4

Kow, fMitiemeni if this evidence of the da-
darstiona ahikesyonr mind to be ftufiy ob-
tained! without any bapes» or tan hdd out,
said thtfH /on «ill nsbskbr Mm the drcuna-
stances of the case altogether as well ao htm,
the diitBGttte^ony; If lofty^ you beiiAve,
that those deciatations fell vduntariy Iiom
thepriaonori that they foU firten fand kothn
diotatooof a brutd hetft. leoalvod noon the
deswudion of the ihan he waa qiookmg to,
and cardoMof the oonooqu6noea; if yim b».
iieve tlmt» And thai ths^ wore not induced bjr
hopes or foam, ttmn you will consider, how
for they eoiiDbotato the koeouBl gmn by
Ferris. Yea wUl codsllot tba dedasataoaa ib
that point of view, whether they induce yon
tobelievo thhtaooMni to betibo; beeanse
you must belibve Iknt^ in aider to eonvkt tha

Srboneri beeanse no asprssiMna of the meat
ffutal disposiUon^ even although they alloda
to his even ae^ with a fAfi and for a
party, will be.slimdent to eonvkt the pii-
soner, unless you bdieve that party to hava
heed, and that )tatt|ni«y td hate eibled
withi the very pnsons nnn^ m the iadiel^
ment, or one of them. You nmsl bdiefw
that, andtfaat oinglo foetuses not come fooMi
either k)rd Caifaatopton or Md BnnitkitienL
but foom Forni alone: ha alond Jfoka of
the nameo mentioned in the indictment.
OentloMOH if upon the whole of the aasot

rmdobeliavo,nolwithotandingtheol0O^mM
hava alhidedifci aa baaibigii|Oiitii« ciadilef

877]

lo Muritr Lord Carhamphiu

A. D. 1797.

[878

Ferfifl^ froia hit ftcconnt of tbe tranMiclioDy and
from whatyou have hcftid from lords Carfaamp-
ton and EnnialuUeiiy without aoy ratiooal
duubt upon your misdi^ thai account of Fenris
tp bo true, a^d thai tho prisooer was involved
iq the copapiracy in the manner Ferris told;
yoUy then, in my apprehensioDt a ease is made
%9ainst the prisooer. But if you utterly dis-
Mievewhat Ferris has said, then notwiib<
alaadios the dechurations proved by lords
Carhampton and Enniskillen, in my appro*
b«aston» jwo ought to acqitil the prisoner^ I
aiy, notwithstandmg these deckrations, If
^hiegr do not induoe you to beUeve the acooiml
given by Fms.

But whether these dcelamliona are fur^
sbHiMid, pr wMbor li^ piisooer was mflu-

eneed fay the cifcumslance of the noUe feed
being known to be umed, is all matter for
your ooBsideratiott; If jwu ib believe, that
these declarations were induced by ho^ or
fear, r^ect them altogether; then the case
stands upon the testimony of Ferris, 'and if
upon his statement merely, you cannot salely
rely upon it, then acquit the prisoner; but if
you have no rational doubt, coileded lM»n the
testimony of Ferris, and that it is supported
by the testimony of lords Carhampton and
Eani6killan,then you oi^t toeoofvict hiaa. '

The JuFf aetlred £» half an houty and re*
turned with a verdict of— Guilty.*

^ Sea the nest case^

624. Proceedings oa the Trial of Pavrick Oartt for conspiring
to Murder the Right Honoviftble Henry Lawes Luttrett^
Sari of Caih$«(ip<;on,; txied before the Court holden under;
a Coinjmsswn of Oyer and Terminer at Uublm, oij Wed-^
nesday Octoher 25jth : 88 George HI. a. d. 1797.*

l^ATSilCK CAMTY mm thiaday biougM
«p and pi^ to hk chaHeng^i, when the panel
^ras calfsd over aafoUotwa i

WHIiam Thompson, esq« chaUengad pe«
■empCorilv by the prisoner.

James VftMey esq* sameu

Robert Sbawe^ osq. swoin.

JeSnf Fool, eso. swona.

liaiMPfce Mamtk^ nn^rohanl challenged p»*
lemptorily by ttie prisonec

P«lriali Cw^^ meichant^ set by on the
partofUiecrowa.

Robert French, mamhani, SiPom.

Fcanaiatfamilton, mefchant, chatteoged pe-
ismptority by the. pnsoDcr.

Arthur Reene, mersfaant, svoro.

Charles WiiMims^ meK^hant, challenged
peremptorily b]r the prisoner.

Alaxattdar SliMUy meiebaiit^ srtasnr

Edward Diuit, merchant, challenged pe»
sempsnilybythe pawner*

wiliiam Inrkneaa, meM^mnt^ swovn.

David GoiirteMry, merehaniiL chaliaiimdpa*
remptorily by the prisysar*

£dward-Kee» men^Jiaiil, same.

John Bvatt, memlntit, enom.

WitUaai Laacake, m^wiiai^ saane.

Robert Nmlle, merehant^ ehalleagftd pe*
temploffihr by the prisoner.

Richaro Wilson, merchant, awom.

€hri8tO]>her Ormsby^ mercaanty ehallenged
peremptorily by the prisoner.

I »i

• ReponoAibv WilHam Badgcway, esq« bft-
fistar at b|r. loathe pfeee^in^ cast.

Fnmob Brady, merdianit, swom«

Thomas ttfiodrick, merehanti suroin.

William Jiearstes, merchai^ ckalkngeil
peremptorily by the prisoner.

Beiyamia Simpsoiv merchant, sama

Thomas Abbott, merchant^ same.

Jqahua Lacv, meacbant^ same. .

John Gampbell, merchant, same^

Ralpb Shaw, merchant^ same.

Aleraadrr Fklertou, merchant^ set by on
tlle4part^of the crawn^

^iUiBm Lect, oq. challiHiged peiemptotHj.
by the prisoner.

David Clarke, merchant, set by on the part
afthf^orovn.

Tbooias Wilkinson, aMrchant^ sworn-

TBE runx,

SiM^ Shaw, John Bvatt,

Jeffirey Foot, William Laacake,.

Robert, H. French, Richard Wilson,

Arthur Keene^ Francis Baady,

Aleiander StillM Tboans Hendriok,

WiUiam Harfcness, Tbomaa Wllkuison.
To whom ^e prisoner was given in-chaigew

Jwa«i. lirrU Examined by Mr. 2Wa<#^i.

Do vou know the prisoner at the bavl— 1
do; I nave seen him befbie.
Where did you first see himP-^In SCiaad-

street

Was it in the street, or ina hauseP^^Atthe
house of a publican ctf the name of Aftuirioe
Donfei. '

Was he alone, or in. company vM» any sack
what persoi»?«*-He was in company with a
man (V^thenaaoe o^ James DuuDi aAd^thresi

879] 58 GEORGE III. Trial qfP^riek Carigfar eotufbing

[880

others, Peter Reily, John Brodertck, and , Ed-
ward Martin.

Before you proceed farther, point out the
prisoner? — ^This u the roan.

[Here the witness produced a paper.]

What paper is that ?-— A paper of the names
written hy roe as they came in.

At the time?— Yes.

This partv came to the house ? — ^Yes.

What did they do ?*— They were to meet a
committee of seven of the persons who were
at the meeting in the mornm^.

Did they meet that committee ?— All but
one.

Can you mention the names of those they
metf— I can ; William Carrige, James Fair-
weather, Garret Byrne, Thomas Byrne, and
John Farrell: Hicky, one of the oersons
named of the committee did not attend.

They joined the company ?— They did.

Be so good as to state to the Court and the
jury what passed in that company in pre-
sence .of the prisoner? — We aqjoumed to a
private room at the rear of Uie tap-room—^

Who? — ^The persona nam^» except Fair-
weather, who did not come until rather late.

As soon as you got into the inside room,
what passed ?— I was appointed chairman of
the committee on that meeting.

Be so good as to state what was said bythe
prisoner or any one in his presence ?— -Tho-
tnas B^rne asked James Dunn, << Are these
your friends you 'mentioned to me in the
morning ?" He said they were, and Byrne
asked, u they were straighiy or up, I do not
ki^ow which. He said, if they were not, he
would have nothing 'to do with them.

Who said ? — ^Dunn said.

What was said then ?— '< Well now/' said
Thomas Byrne, ** we know what we are met
upon, let us proceed to business ; well now let
us hear your plan, Mr. Dunn.**

Who sud thatP^Thoma^ Byrne.

"Why," said Dunn," as I was telling you
this morning, the way. would.be for us to
wait behind the hedge, and then shp at him ;
I know the country well, and we can make
off across.*' Thomas Byrne did not approve
of eoing on foot as being liable to danger ; he
said, " rll tell you what I was thinking, the
best way will be to go out mounted, tSkt in
case of any alarm or pursuit, we may be able
to flet off.'' . That was immediately adopted,
and agreed to. It was first asked, " How
many ought to so upon the occasion."

Who asked that ?-^I think Byrne, to the
best of my recollection. It was then men-
tioned nine, which I made. a noteof— ntne
number mouniec/— That for some time seemed
to be the prevailioe opinion ; however, it was
mentioned by John Farrell, that no man
should be .exempt from going.

No man ?— No man of the company then
present updnanoccasioiiofthe kmd; upon
which Carrige one^of the party,, made an ob-
jectkm, and said, he could not attend Cm the
Tuesday night following.

What meeting was there to be that night T
— A farther meeting of the committee to pre*
pare and consult for the expedition.

Cottrl.— I do not understand that; yon say
Carrige refused to be of the party to execute
the business ? — ^No^ but that ne could not at*
tend the next meeting.

Mr. Townshend, — ^What passed then about
the meeting on horseback ?— Farrell having
said what 1^ did, it was agreed they should
all so.

What was agreed upon f— Byrne mentioned
that three at least should ^ on the road to
Luttrelstown, disguised with loose coats, and
blunderbusses, and the rest to go armed with
pistols, as yeomen cavalry.
* What time was appointed ?— The Sunday
following.

\Vhatwere they to doP— The three with-
blunderbiisses were to come behind the car-
risge, and fire in

what carriage?— The post chaise' in which
lord Carhampton used to go out . It was also
mentioned, that the footman and postilUon
were to be (foae out. Dunn said -all the ser-
vants knew him, and it would be doing no-
thing without taking them off, as they would
all M discovered—" And most of them know
me'too," said Carty the prisoner.

How was that proposal received ?— It was
received ^eiy wcU, and agreed to. The • yeo-
men cavalry, after the three fired in, were to
pass on, and fire into the windows, lest any
miss should happen inside from the fire, and
were to kill the postillion and footman ; they
were then to re*charge their pieces, keep in a
body, make on towaras Dublin, and keep in a
bodyto secure their retreat, and then when they
came near the skirts of the town, they were
to disperse, and go different ways. — I omitted
to mention, thai on their coming in, they
were told^ tiiatan oath of secrecy was taken in
the morning, and it was necessaiy they should
take one also, which they did.

Who said that?^Dunn.

Mention the namesofthose who took the
oath ?— John Broderick, Peter Reily, Patrick
Carty, and. Edward Martin, they so having

fivea their names to me : I never saw them
efore.

What Patrick Carty ?--The prisoner at Iha
bar. ;

After whatydu have mentwaed, alxNit their
returning and dispersing, did anv thing iar-
thev pass?— There did. Itwas asked by Tho-
mas Byrne, addressing himself to Dunn-—
" Have any. of you any arms ?"——** My
friend, Reily," says Dunn, " has a bkinder-
buss ; but ror ny part» I have kept no piftols
in my house, since the a&ir of theCcMrmicks^'
— ^A further oath was then proposed, an4
taken by all present, " To be staunch, and
steady, and true to one another in the busi-
ness "

After the taking of the oath, was there any
thing further F— There vrasby Byrne,
"mis it in. the presence tii tfaeprisonnf-^

t

881}

io Mufder Lord Carhampton.

A. D. 1797.

[882*

Yt^ i Bvpie, addressifig himself to Duon,
aikedy " Did Carty live down there ?" mean-
i6g Carty, the prisoner —he said, he lived down
there in thedemesne,under lord Carhampton.
That is all I recollect, which passed that
•vening, Dquor was then ordered in, and I
went away.

Couri. — Who was it mentioned, where
Carty lived ? — He himself, they were all asked
where they lived.

Mr. Townshend.^^Do you know any thin^
farther Massing in the presence ofthe prisoner?
— ^Not tnat nieht

At what other time ?--All that I recollect
is, that I saw the prisoner at Maurice Dunn's
bouse tlic Sunday morning, the day the busi-
ness was to be done, the 14th of M^, but I
had no conversation with him. Tliomas
Byrne, after the business was settled, asked
me if I had any arms ; I told him I had not,
but I would endeavour to get some^ and I went
to a pawnbroker.

• On the Sunday morning when you saw. the
prisoner, was there any thing said by any
one in his presence ? — Not in his presence.

The party who met Dunn were a commit-
tee ?— They were.

Of what body ? — A body calling themselves
C/nited Irishmen. A Baronial Committee.

James jPefrts* cross -eiamined by Mr. Gurran.

You arc an attorney ?— Yes.

Of which of the courts?— Of the Kfflg's-
bench.

That is the criminal court ?— The criminal
court ! I do not understand you.

Is this the first time of your appearing in
irour present character P-^This is the second
time I have appeared upon this table.

You are a respectable attorney ? — ^I consider
myself so. '

And are generally considered so ? — I do not
know ; I consider myself so.

You were censured ?— I was, for not attend-
ing pursuant to an order forlodginsan appeal.

Was there a conditional order for striking
youofflhe roll?— Yes.
. I)id.you ever show cause? — No; never.

How long is that order in force ?— Since Ja-
nuaiy last.

You never showed cause ?— No.

You intend to show cause? — No, I cannot
say thai I do i but if I did, I dare say the per-
son who made the charge against me will
prove himself to have sworn falsely.

Then you will make a counter-charge ? —
No ; but I say, if I did, that would be part of
it, that he was not to be believed.

But you do not say yon would make a
ehar^e against an innocent person ? — God
forbid!. , .

Are thcie notes iir your bosom ?— No, But
IK(^ arepi!«tols.

^ Are tfeey cocked?— No, but half-cocked ; and
It w neosMaiy for the protectioa of my persom

Were V!)& ever concerned itt a cauic of RWl ^
agahist f ai^fl f _X was.

\0L, XXVI.

,-

Were you concerned for Kelly against Far-
rell ? — I was.

Were you concerned for Farrell against
Kelly ? — I told you I was.

Do you now say you were ? — ^I do.

Did you bring an action in the name of
Hickson?— Idid.

With his permission ? — I did. I apprised
him of it, and had his permission.

Did you ever deny that you did? — ^No.

And you brought the action of 'Farrelt
against Kelly ? — 11 es, by the desire of Farrell.

And you never denied that by affidavit ? —
No. Even if I had not a]>prised Hickson of
ity I mieht issue the writ in his name, for a
partnership was agreed upon a few days be-
fore, between us.

State what the cause v^s of Kelly against
Farrell ; there was a note returned by Mrs.
Farrell ?— I do not know.

Did you hear that Mrs. Farrell returned a
note to Kelly ?— I can otily take U. from Kelly's
affidavit; I can form no belief of it; Iwaa-
not present at the conversation.

Do you not believe npoa 5[our oath, that
Kelly did get the note ?— I am inclined to be^
lieve if.

Was not he ta give Mrs. Farrell 10/. for
restoring the note? — ^I am inclined to be-
lieve so.

. Do you not believe, that he gate her more
than lOl, ?— I do not.

Do you not believe he gate her 10/. ? —
I do.

You were agent for htm in the aetion
against Farrell— that wasto recover the ba-
lance over the 10/. ?— It was to recover a sum
of t4/. 15«. 9d.

Part of that was an alleged balance over
the 10/. ? — I believe it was.

Then you as agent of Kelly brought an ac-
tion aeamst Farrell for a sum, part of which
was mr a payment beyona the 10/. which
Kelly made Farrell above the note— Did you
not bring au action against Kelly for reco*
very of that note ?— I do not say it was that
very note : He swore the other man was in-
debted to him in 100/.

Do you not know that an action of trover
cannot be brought for a sum of money ? — I do
not say exactly it was an action of trover ; as
well as I recollect it was. .

Do you not think, that such an action can^
not be brought for money ? — I do.

Then was not the action far the very note?
-^Not for the very note ; it was for 100/.

And he had so muchr conscience, he did
not brine the actk>n for the paper ?— He only
wanted the. value.

Aod you caused Kelly to be arrested ?— He
was arrested.

Did .yoM ever swear you knev^ nothing of
bis bring inrrestcdP— I never did^ upoa my
oath.

There waa, something ofarapc?— I knew
nothit^g ofM^iM believe there wiks no rape
eommitted*

3 L ' .

88^ 38 GEORGE IIL Trial sf Patrick CaHy/ar conspiring [881

Did you ever think there waif— I nerer
did*

Did you ever fill up a release for Kelly to
Farrell?-.! believe I did.

. Was not that a release against a 8U[>po8ed
rape ? — ^I did not consider it so at that time.
1 Po you; not believe it was a release of a
rape ? — I do not I believe it was in full of
all pecuniary demands on account of that bu-
siness for which he was in custody.

He was in gaol for 100/.?— Not that I
knew of.

Was any part paid^ or secured f — I believe
Kelly signed five notes for 10/. each.

And a release was g^ven for the whole debt ?
•--I believe at that time Kelly would not have
signed the notes, unless he were released.
. Did vou consider Kelly in your conscience
as indebted to Farrell in the entire of that
note?— -I did not.

You considered it a foul demand f — I did
not think it. an honftst demand.

Was there any particular day appointed for
your paying over the sum of 14/. 15s. 9d. ?—
There was.

You received that sum for the use of your
client^ Kelly ?— I did, but he refused to make
ao affidavit of the debt

Then you repaid it ?— No, I did not
• You kept it yourself?— I did.

But you were determinecl so soon as it ap-
pears who is intitled, to pay it ?'— I do not say
that ; I suppose I will never get from under
the attachment, onleas I do pay it

Did you ever swear you were ready to pay
it ?-~I never swore anv thing about it

You filled up these five notes?— I did.

Did you ever swear you never did ?— I did
not

You drew the whole of the notes except the
name?— I did.

Did you ever deny it?— No.

You never denied you issued the writ
against Kelly ?— Never.

You never denied any part of the transac-
tion ?— I admitted there was no affidavit to
ground the writ upon, and that was one of the
grounds of the attachment

That was an affidavit you swore P— No; I
admitted it to Kelly.

Did you draw any examination for the rape ?
— ^Never.

You swear that ?— I do, positivelv.

Did you see any examination ?•— I did not

Where were you at the time of the drawing
IhenotesP-nIn An^l-alley, High-street
> Who was with you?— I believe Farrell
was.

Wiwt Farrell ? — He that was prisoner.

Was Edward Smith Farrell there?—! be-
fieve he was.

Did you sign these notes by him ?— I did.

Did you ever deny that upon your oath?
—No.

Did you know a publican of the name of
Reilly ?-I did.

Did you fill a certificate of a license for
him? — ^Never. *

Did you ever see » certificate t6 fSrdpufe a
license for him with the nam^ of sir WiUian^
Worthington ?— Never ; 1 wito not in the habit
of procurmg license^. . ,

Did you ever procure a license of that iitA t
— Never.

Did you ever sign the naine William Wor-
thington to any such license ?-T^Never. , .

Had you ever a note from Cooniui to Syl-
vester Farrell ? — I luid.

Did you ever write an indorsement upon
that note ? — Never, upon my. oath.

Upon your word ?— You have my answer
upon my oath, and I will give you no other.

I will not presLS you ; did vou ever sign the
name Edward Smith to an affidavit?—! drew an
affidavit in the cause of Farrell agaihst Hand^.
at the instance of Edward Smith t'arrell, m
the name of Edward Smith, to s6t aside a non-
suit ; I never signed the name Edward Smith,
to it ; I gave it to Edward Smith Farrell^ and
he took It away, and I never saw it since.

!t was firom motives of mere honesty and
loyalty that yQuhe(:ame|t doited Irishmap?
—It was : to counteract their desijgnsii it t
found them inimical to the constitutioff of the
country.

And you did so, without expectation of r«»
ward?— I considered myself bound by my
oath, when I utea admitted aa attorney..

And under the conscionahle oblig»tion.of
that oath, you became an infbrroer ? — ! did.

You expect no reward?— No, ! have not
been promised, nor do I expect any. !f It
were to GO again, t would.

Is it notpart of the at,(omey's oath, that yotf
are to act raurly and justly by your client ?— I
think it is.

Upon your oath, do you think yoO acted
ndrlv and justly to Kelly f— I did not

Then tKe attorney's oath is cracked ib the
slinesP— t will answer vou fairly. '

Were you ever directly, or indirectly ^veh
to understand by any oody^ tb'a^ you would
receive any reward, or ackqipwledgment, for
the^iart you are now performmgr— I never
had. a promise frop mankind. .

Did any body give you to uiidehtand, that
you would ^et a remrdf— Never: no^m^n
directly or Ujidirectly made aqy promiae, or
gave me to iinderstand—

Nor went so far, that if you a^^ed fairly and
honestly, you stiould baive comp^^Uon?--*
Never, upon my oath.

Did younever expect any the least compen^
sation r— Having had no proitiise, I can baW
no expectation.

Do you know a man of thftrnuae of Alex-
ander Duggan ?— I never saw such a man, ^kw
do I know a man of thaC ilame.

Did you ever tell a;(fy nm so!—I did not

Did you^ay you imew Duggiia upon jfour
former examination?«-nSie;- fwas aakwUal
Mondigr in the same way. aod'answevedllHl
I knew no rnidb bmui. Ifniefe ho such a.l)|i^
put him upon the'taUe, wl-CMifient ium
with me.

n

^5j|

to Munfer Lard Carhampton.

A. D. 1797.

t8S6.

Jbeiri^ ]M)p. J^tnry Luom LuUrd, Earl of
C^rkampUmf eiamined by Mr. Attorney

Does your lordship know the prisoner at the
>ar?— Ido.

Pray, my lord, what is his name ? — Patrick
Carty.

How long has your lordship known him ? —
I have known him since he was a very little
Iwy.

How came vour lordship acquainted with
him ? — His father lived under roe.

Where?— Near the demesne of Luttrels-
•jtowq ; he has a house rent free.

And how was this man employed ?— This
inan was employed, together with his father,
for many yws back, as constant labourer in
mydemesne of Luttrelstown.
' jDo you know, was the prisoner apprehended
and put into confinement? — He was appre-
-hended in my presence in consequence of the
; information given me by one James Ferris, on
' Sunday the 14th of May.

Had ^er^ls given vou any other information
against him than wnat he told you that dav?
'^— He had given me information of the plot
'agunst mv life.

* pdr. M*Naliy^ for the prisoner, objected to
this evidence.]

Mr. Attorn^ General, — When was the pri-
, soner arrested ?— On Sunday the 14th of May.

Was he committed to prison ?— He was, m
my presence.

To what prison ?— To Ritmainham.

When did your lordship first see him afler
he was so committed ?— Afler he was so com-
mitt^— I saw him, I think, on the day
after.

What conversation had your lordship with
^him at that time ?»None, as I recollect.

When did you again see him ? — ^I saw him
to have conversation with him after Dunn had
confessed.

How soon after was that ? Can your lord-
ship recollect the day? — I think it was on the
'Tuesday.

Where did your lordship see him then?
—•1 saw him in the cell in which he was con-
fined.

'* Who was with your lordship ? or was any
body f —-The first time I saw him, I went in
,to him alone; I told him, I was well ac-
quainted with the particulars of the plot
^ajpinst my life, and asked him

Mr. M'Nally. — ^I am instructed to ask,
..whether there was any written confession, or
declaration taken from the prisoner ?

Mr. Attorney General, — You are misin-
j formed; there was none at that time, and not
IfbrsoAiedavs after.

£tfrl of Larhdmpton, — ^I can positively say,
thefe .was no information at that time; nor
' %is it' in contemplation.

Mr. 4f'JV<i//y.— But I submit, if there be

ax^'lnforination taken at any time from the

^JB^n«^ of tbexonspiracy^ it b^ome9 better

eyidence thaa parol evidence, and such in-
formation exchides the parol evidence alio-
f ether : because the rule of law is, that the
est evidence ought to be produced, and writ-
ten information is evidence of an higher na-
ture than a parol confession.

Mr. Justice Downet, — At present, it does
not appear that any thing was written.

Mr. Attorney General,"^! will save trouble.
Does your lordship know, whether any exa-
mination, or confession in writing was made
or given by the prisoner upon the subject
matter now examining into ? — I do.

When was that examination given ?— It was
not given before me, but in my presence,
about a fortnight after Carty was committed.

Do vou know whether that be in existence
or not? — I believe it is.

Now mention what the conversation waa,
which passed between you and the prisoner P

Mr. JuUicc Downet. — At what time was
this conversation ? Was it before the exami«
nation or aAer ?

Earl of CarAompfmi.— The conversation I
had, happened about a fortnight previous to
any examination being taken, or, I believe*
before any examination was in contemplation.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— Inform the Couit
and the Jory what conversation passed.

Mr. If^a/fy.— The objection I make is
this : — ^There was a conversation between the
prisoner and lord Carhampton:— -Sub8e<}uent
to this there was a written examination, infor-
mation, or confession, I know not which,
taken by a magistrate, acting in bis judicial
situation, as a magistrate. That confession,
or information containing the matter, of si-
milar matter to that which had been given in
conversation by parol, precludes the witnesa
from going into the parol evidence, the for-
mer being the best evidence now which the
nature of the case admits.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— My lords, unless
your lordships think it necessary, I will no%
trouble you with saying a word.

Mr. Af*Na//y.--Lord Carhampton heard
all that passed by parol, and he neard what
was reduced to wntinv; the parol confession
then oueht not to be given in evidence.

Mr. Justice Boyd,— li is laid down, that
'' an express confession is where a person di-
rectly confcsfies the crime with which he is
charged, which is the highest conviction that
can be. and may be received after the plea of
not guilty is recorded, notwithstanding the re-
pugnancy ; for the entry is, that the defendant
pottea^ or relicta verificatione, cognovit tn</ic/o-
mcTifttm."

Mr. M*Nally,'"'My lord, I admit that
rule, but this is an exception to that rule ; for
hero is better evidence than a declar-
ation upon parol ; for here the matter is re-
duced to writing^ it cannot be mistaken ;—
words may be mistaken and misconceived ;
but if the written evidence be produced, the
prisoner cannot controvert it by crossrcxami-
nation ; it is unequivocal evidence, which no

fi87] 38 GEORGE HI. Trial of Patrick Cartyfor cwspiring

£888

ihing can alter, or do away. This precludes
ihe general rule from operating*

Mr. Attomev General, — My Lords, Id this
•■case, I offer evidence of a conversation pass-
ing freely between the prisoner and an indi-
.<vidual, not conversing with him as a magis-
trate, not exercising, or pretending to exer-
.cise any of the authorities of a magistrate.—
That such evidence is admissible, no lawjrer
can dispute. It is the evidence upon which
A conviction was had two nights since. But
it is objected, that the best evidence which
;the nature of the case will admit must be
.given. Th^ leiur^ed counsel, to sustain his
.argument, if it can be sustained at all, must
.admit, that what passed before lord Ennis-
Icillen upon oath, is admissible evidence
agjainst the prisoner. The counsel must ad-
■xnit that, or he contends for nothing. Then
admitting that, how is it that the evidence
now offered is not the best evidence ? — is it
because it is not the best evidence the nature
f)f the case admits? .We are not about to
give evidence b^ parol, what the contents of
.these examinations, or informations are ; but
we offer evidence of what passed a fortnight
l)efore — I would not be riaiculous enough to
offer parol evidence of the contents of the in-
Ibrroations reduced to writing ; but we con-
tend to offer that evidence which is uniformly
received, namely, a converbation passing be-
tween the prisoner and lord Carhampton, who
'went to him and freely conversed with him upon
two different days, at a time when examina-
tions, or information were not in contempla-
tion. Therefore we offer to prove that which
.cannot be shown by better evidence. We do
liot offer a single syllable of what is contained
in the information. It appears, that lord Car-
Jiampton visited the prisoner two or three
times, and had conversations, which tend to
^elucidate the charge ; and now it is contended
that when we have different species of evi-
dence, applying to different periods of time,
(we are not to give that which is applicable to
one period, because it is said to be an inferior
;)pecies of evidence to that which is applicable
to another. But the evidence oflered is the
hesi which the case admits of, as applicable
.to the period when it happened.

Mr. Justice Boyd ^-Mr. Attorney General,
jwe hfkve no doubt. Go on with the evidence.

Mr. Justice Downe$. — It appears to be sim-
ply this: Lord C^rhampton's testimony is
offered to prove a ^act, happening upon a par-
ticular day, namely, a conversation with the
prisoner. Then the objection is, that some-
thing happened afterwards which made that
conversation not evidence.

Mr. il/^orn/ry G finer a I. -^Mention the con-
versations which passed, in the order in which
ihey did pass. But bpfore we proceed, in-
ibrm the Court and the Jury, upon the most
careful recollection you can make, whether
in these copversatlons or any of them, before
\hey began, or during the course of them>the
prisoner was impres:>ed by you with any ex-

pectation, or hop« of pardon, or whether be
was impressed, with any fear or terror ?

Earl of Carhampton, — Whenever I do recol-
lect, and I will take care to recollect, that I
did throw out any expectation to the prisoner
I will not fail (o tell it Whenever I gave
him any the smallest hope, I will not fail to
mention it, in the order in which it happened.

Mr. M'Nally, "Did you at any time ,give,
and you may answer yes or no, any expecta-
tions, or hold out any to the prisoner ?

Earl of Carhampton,"! say, positively, that
at the time of the conversation I am going to
mention, and fur many days after, it was my
firm determination, not to offer to either of
the prisoners upon any condition of any kind,
either 6f confession to me, or any other, any
expectation, or hope of pardon.

Mr. M*Nalfy. — Do you know Dunn, the
under-gaoler of Kilmaiuham?

[The Court said Mr. M^Nalljr was prema^
ture in extending his examination so far.]

Mr. Emmett. — I beg leave to remind your
lordships of a case determined at Clonmel),
before one of your lordships. The evidence
offered was a confession, and you permitted
me, as counsel for the prisoner, to cross-exa-
mine not merely as to hopes or fears held
out by the party himself; but whether hopes
or fears were held out by any other person ;
and it appeared that a police-man had held
out the expectation of the party being received
as an approver, upon which your loraship was
so gooa as to reject the evidence.

Mr. Justice Downet»-^\ have no recollec-
tion of the case. But t})e priqciple is this :
that where a confession is offered, the coun-
sel for the prisoner may ask under what cir-
cumstances that confession was given ; whe-
ther under the circumstance which makes it
inadmissible. But if the witness denies that
any such circumstance did exist, the evidence
is admissible to the Jury, who are to deter-
mine upon the weight and effect of it.

Mr. Kmmelt, — My lords, I only desire to
show by preliminary evidepce, that there were
circumstances of hope and expectation attend-
ing the confession, and though such circum-
stances were not occasioned l?y the witness,
but by others, ye( they render the evidence
inadmissible.

Mr. Cttrran.— pif the confession be gi

of

iven
under an impression upon the miiid oT the
party, no matter by whom that impression b
made, the evidence is inadmissible.

Mr. Justice Domiei. — I do not tbidk the
law goes so far. The prisoner may have
hopes, but they may not be raised by the per-
son to whom he makes the disclosure ; in that
ca9e, they do not preclude |he evidence.

Afr. Curran.— But, niy lord^ if the man he
entrapped, no matter by whoni, by one man,
or apother, and the disclosure is n)ade to a
different person, th^ evidence is 9till in'adav)9-
sible. Suppose^, ^oes to the prisoner and
says, ** you will be haog^, unlets yoa diseo-

889]

to Murder Lord Carhampton.

A. D. 1797.'

C890

Ter/' then A, retires^ and m his absence^ the
prisoner makes a discovery to B, such disco-
very is not admissible. Then we only ask
the witness, whether any circumstances of
hope or fear were held out hj lord Carhamp-
tou,or any other person by his means.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— I have no objection

to the question, nor am I apprehensive of the

answer to it ; but I do not wish to depart

' from the ordinary rule of proceeding in these

cases.

Lord Carhamptm. — My Lords, I feel my-

* self, that if I had by myself, or anv other per-
son, caused previous hopes to be held out to

' the prisoner U> induce him to make a confess
sion for the purpose of bringing it into evi-

' dence afterwaras against him-^ say, I have
that sort of feeling, that it would be an im-
proper act ; and I never did by myself, or any
other person, hold out any expectation to the

. prisoner.

Mr. Curran, — We know his lordship did
not hold out those expectations himself, «or
cause it to be done ; but the question is, whe-
ther it was done bv any other person. In a
case of life, counsel are not to urge personal
feelings. We want to know whether those
impressions were made upon the mind of the
prisoner by other persons or not.— The written
declaration of a prisoner is like all other evi-
dence ; it must be proved according to law. If
it be extorted bv menace, it cannot be evidence,
and that must be examined into before the pa-
per is read, because otherwise an impression

* may be made upon the minds of the jury, not
' to be afterwards removed. A prisoner may

be frightened into a confession, no matter by
whom. Suppose a man goes to a prisoner
and tells him, a magistrate will be here, and
unless you confess you will suffer; and imme-
diately after a magistrate comes, and under
the impression of what was first said, the pri-
soner makes a declaration, surely that is not
evidence. The time to inquire into these cir-
cumstances is previous to the confession be-
ing given in evidence. The question to be
asked is, did the prisoner make the confession
under any impression? None by me, says
the witness : that is not an answer, because
' if it were done by any other person, the evi-
dence is inadmissible.

Mr. Solicitor General.'^My Lords, there is no
insinuation, that the confession was obtained
from the prisoner by collusion between the
witness and any other person ; if there were,
the learned gentleman michthave some found-
ation for his argument, tnat the evidence was
inadmissible.

Mr. Justice Boyd. — Do you see any incon-
venience in asking the witness, whether the
party was under any impression ? *
Mr. Attomy Qe]ier^/,-^-My Lord, as to in-
' convenience 'I do not S^anf^^bnt even sup-
..pose.the under-gaoler 9uqmis'.i)ib gentlemen
;;.tiaert; it wo61d not tehdtr tjieeviderice inad-
missible ^-^r the qu^^lofi now is whether
the evidence offered b« admissible. We do

not say it is conclusive, because it may be re-
butted, and the counsel for the prisoner may
examine the uuder-gaoler. A confession may
be given in evidence, and the person proving

^ury, toge-
ther with the confession, who will, exercise
their judgment upon the whole of the evi-
dence. But your lordships will not, without
the interposition of the competent jurisdic-
tion, try that evidence upon which the
case may turn. With regard then to the ad-
missibility of evidence, it is inconvenient to
proceed in this manner. But with regard to
the question of fact to be tried by the jury, I
see no inconvenience.

Mr. Justice Downes, — It strikes me, that
upon this objection now made, it is matter of
very little consequence, whether the question
be now put, or reservedf till the time when the
witness shall come to be cross-examined.
Because I suppose this : — I cannot guess at
the answer which the noble lord will give ; but
if his lordship said, that some person or other
had held out hopes to the prisoner, that wouM
not preclude the evidence; because the jury
roust consider it, and determine for them-
selves, whether the confession were free, or
given under tlie influence of such impression,

Ht. Emmett.^ykf U^rds^ if '\i copre out
upon the cross-examination, that the confes-
sion were made under the impression of hope,
there will not be any necessity for sending an
issue to the jury. If indeed it came oat upon
belief, considering it a matter of doubt, then a
separate issue should be sent up to the jury, to
determine, whether the confession was made
under the impression of hope, or fear, and ac-
cording to the determination of the jury upon
that issue, the evidence may be received or
r^ected.

Mr. Justice Dovnei. — I never knew an in-
stance of that.

Mr. Solicitor General.^My lords, the lati-
tude of the position laid down by Mr. Kmmett
is not reconcileable to the principles and rules
of evidence, which have been hitherto received
in courts of criminal justice. The position
would amount to thiii, " That if at the time of
the confession made, there existed in the mind
of the person acaised an impression of hope,
or fear, though not proceedmg from the con-
duct or procurement of the witness to whom
the confession was made, and under examina-
tion, that such confession is not admissible
evidence." And it is contended, that previous
to such evidence being received, a collateral
issue should so to the jury, to ascertain the
truth, and reality of such impression. The
novelty of such an argument, and the uniform
course of examination, in similar cases, might
refute the argument adduced. If the exist-
ence of such impre^ioi^s in tlie mhld were to
render the confessf6p'*6f the person making
the confession inad^^fble, the confession of
ft (juihT-maii could never be received, If the

891} SSGEOBGSJIL Trial ^ Pairi/Jk Part^^ cor^ring {?»

UQfQrtimale mioi ^ tt^e W is te^lf gwl^ 9^
t.Ue crime imputed >o hua^ bow 19 U posswj^*
that his mind should have remained unagitated
by hope, or fear?-r-Fe^r, like susp^ion, do^
ever haunt the euUty mind- A3 to hope — it
is an inseparable quality— an unalienable
tenant of the mind.-nCt is.

-The

man's health —

The captive's freedom-*«nd the beggar's
wealth.

It is that which can give consolation to the
most afflicted and most wretched ; it clings ^o
us whikt we are Jiving, nor *' auits us when
we die/' The .bare existence tnen of those
impressions cannot ei^clude the admissibility
of the evidence ; but the single preliminary
question tp be asked is, whether tne witness,
under examination^ caused by himselft or ^y
jmy other qpieans, suqh impressions tp be
made, at the time of the confession, or at aqy
other time, to procure such confession, and
was such confession made freely ^d volun-
tarily, ornot?

Thus, mv lords, I argue as to the single
point of 'admissibility. I say nothing as to
the weiffhty or degree of credit that the evi-
dence should have with the jury, under the
circumstances of the case :-*tbat is for tbom
to determine.

The examination was then feanme^.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— Your lonUl^ip will
please to mention the conversation yop had
with the prisoner?-— I told Carty, he was one
of the last persons I jBhould have supposed
would be concerned in a plot against my life.
He told me, he knicw nothing of the matter;
I told the prisoner I had sufficient knowledge
of the fact, to convince me that it was the
case, and that he was concerned in it I told
faim, that Dunn had confessed the truth to
pe; he replied, that J then wanted no (arther
information from him. I asked him, if be
would tell me nothing; he said. No. I went
.away, and desired 4ie eaoler not to let others
liave access to him. Three or four days.aft^r
that, Dunn came to me— —

What Dunn ?— The nephew of the fi;aoler,
who is under-keeper ; he came and told me,
that the prisoner Cartv desired to see me in
the gaol : he told me, he belicvfiu the prisoner
intended to tell me what he. knew. iVccord*
anely I went to, the prisoner. I asked Carty
if he had sent for me. He said. Yes; ][a$ked
him if he woirfd te)L me the truth now. He
.9aid, he would. Be told me that Dunn led
him into the plot 1 asked h'^m, how, and
when ? , He told me, that on ^le Sunday pro-
ceeding the Sunday on which he had be^n ap«
jProhendedf Dunn had prevailed upon, himi
.when he\had be^n soD(iewhat cqncerni^ m
liquor, to. go w^th him. to a.house in Strand-
.street ; mj. he ^ai jthereintrpduq^ ^y Duqn
Ujto^^rqqpLwhms^yeml persons !Wf^,as^m-
. pW» flwy of. wbpm .Ao had,|aeyi»;wifn be^

'5^« i »»^ W^ W/epI. Jjipww BE?fW»! «wore

tfpou j^ hook ^0 keep jecret :vhi»t .thi^ Wf^re
en^l^i^ to execute, nainely, to shoot me, di^
ft^isi^ in yeomen's cloaths, vipoh my retuiii
from Luttrelstowoy.vpop the Sunday on whicji
X apprehended him> I ask^ hiqi, if he knew
the names of the persons in the room at the
time. He told me, he was acquainted wiUi
some of them, out not of all of them. I
asked \?mi, who he knew that were then pre-
sent. Be told me, that he knew 9.n>derick,
Martin, and Reily, and James Dunn. I askefl
him, if he knew a person of the name of
Ferri^ l(j[e .said» he was told and believed, Y\e
was the head-man, or chairman, as they
called him, of the meeting. I asked hiip,
whidi Martin it was, because I had taken qp
a man of the name of filartin the evening bcs
fore. He descrj^b^Kl the Martin he knew to be
thece to be a roan of that name, a labouring
^man at Luttrelstown, and not the man I had
'taken up, whom I consequently released. —
I aaked him %jaip, hi^.it was to be executed?
He told me wUh pistols and blunderbusses, or
a blunderbuss, t cannot tell which. I ^ked
him, what he did with himself during
weeky between the Sunday that he attei
that meeting, and the Sunday upon which
they were to have executed that deed. . He
repliedy that he worked in my demesne at
ituttrelstown, and that he felt great uneasiness
in his own, mind at what he had ensiged to
be concerned in ; that he went one afternoon
in that week, af^er work, down to Dunn, to
tell .him he did not like the business, and
wished to be let oft*. Dunn replied, as he told
me, that it was but of his power to let him
off; ,he must apply to the committee ; that in
cpnseauence he thought himself bound to at«
tend.tKe comnaittee on, the next Sunday, and
he did attend it,. where he was informed, that-
the business was put off to another day, of
whi9h; he should have pQtiqe ; I left him for
, that time.

Was there any. person present?— At that
tifne? No. I .believe outside were the under-
gaoler ^nd captain Eustace, my aid-de-camp.

Was the door open ? — It was at jar.

Had you any farther conversation ?— No.

.Did you bold put any hopes to him ?— No.

Any impressions of terror?— Certainly not.

You left him then F-rYes. I mentioned to.
my aid-de-camp the substance of what passed^
.and in about two days afterwards I went to
the prisoner again, togejther with my aid-de-
campy captain Eustace, wishing that he like-
wise should hefur him. tell this story: the
prisoner repeated before himt with hardly tiny
variation, what he had mentioned to me be-
fore. .1 listed ^im nearly the 9ame questions
-^e. made, nearly the'same answers.

9eptfor,Cwiyj*5Hher-

'who was ,be?r^I mentioned Wore, ti»t
he liv^ clo^e '%,py deifl^Oi he .is %.J^'

8&3]

to Murdir IMi CtrHa^ifil.

A. t>. IW.

Lfi94

6t ctoi^mlng iJrUh him ^irt the cim^pimcy
tgttinst your Toi^hrp >— I dd not kifow what
conVetsatioti he had With hftn.

Do yoa tiot bd2ve, thai the nidtk^, which
Dunn had for supposing Cartv wouM donfefis,
was that he held out hopes that he should be
saved ?-•! believe hot, and t tell why— I was
a^Jprehensive that Dunn might have he^d out
hopes to him ; therefore I asked him, whether
he had by himself, of from 6ie, held dot any
idducementi and Dunn aatored me he had
nbt.

A Written ^Kaminatiofi has been mentioned;
does }[our lordship know who drew that exa-
rninatioii, or fnfbrmation ? — t believe ye^— I
dVe^ it myself, fh)m recollection of what h6
told roe, in the form of an esaminatfen, and 1
gave it tb Ibrd Enniskillen, who gave it to the
prisoner, and he corrected it himself.
. Do \t\X believe that Dunn, the under-gader,
had a knowledge, that Carry refused to con*
fess on the first day? — I believe he bad. I
dented Dunn to keep the prisoner from com-
munication with other persons, and that I was
in bope&then he might be fnduoed toconlbss.
^ Hien after he refbsed to confess, the toer-
cibn of the gaol was increa^d upon him, thai
he Khight be induced to confess from the se-^
cto^on oTdth^rsf— I teid no such thing, be-
t&iiie he was kept in die same mahner as
l)efbre.

But persons weVe directed to be kept front
liioL; what Was your motive m those direct
'tiods?— Because t am inclined to think, that
solttary confinement has often the effect^
which 1 believe it had upon his mind, to in-
duce people to tonf)$ss ; whereas a comrounU
-catfon with others prevents it.

Then you expected that by sechidine per^
'sons fViom him, he would confess F-^I dra de-
sire when he was first committed, and before
I had .toy comttrsation with him, that he
'mtghtbejputiato Ase|NM»teplaceof coDfine*
'meat

Captain EuMaee exMnioed by Mr. Frvrn

Serjeant.

Do you know Patrick Carty ?— I de*

Point him out?— *There he is«

Did you at any time see him in the gaol of
iKilmainham?-^! dkl.

Who was with vou upon that occasien.f<*^I
was with lord CarnamptoRi.

Were you present at any conversaUao be-
tween hvd Carfaanififtoiiy and the ptisoQer ?-—
I was.

Were any promiseii thsl might have railed
either hope or terror made use of by lord
Carhampton to induce that confession ?^-^
None tint I beard.

You were within hearing ?«— I was.

Be 80 »od as to detail as nearly as you re-
collect, w purport of the conversation? — On
lord Carhiaimpton^s asking bjm, how it hap-
pened he should conspire against his life, the
prisoner answered, and said, that ou S'unday

IrVhat {massed ?-»

[2A«fl^The C«irt aAed the prisoDeKs
coiuijK)^ wh^her they object^ ta tkb
evidence. They answered io the aeg»*
tive ; upon which the examination pro-
ceeded.]

. X told him that bia son hod made the best
aV>nement io hit power for his inteption
aeainst me ; and had Hold me the truth of all
tbaHbaippened'; aiod therefore ym see, that
your son was g^ltyi though yeuinnstedupoB
It to me he was not; for lie bad teU me it
was impossible his son could be conoemed ia
such a IniDsaction ; that he oould nc^ be ^o
ungrateful. The father said, thai he hoped I
would «Dt have, the son hanoed; thai I W|is
willinj^ U> save him, if it tfould be doncy I. told'
the father^ but I did not sep how; wad the
father left me that day withpat any hopea
whatever. Three or ibur dajrs after thie, I
told the father, that if Carty would give eoBi-
miiiatieBs^ I was inclmeU to let him do ao^
and in that.caae, I thought hia fife might be
saved, and desired the father to tell the son ho
-r-iii dmiectueace of whicU, the ^tlier said he
was apprehensive, that if the son gave eiamif
natioiis^ be wouki be murdered. I told the
Either, that I would protect him Hll the tna)t
and aA0rwaidfl| send hini tn Eogjhmd, This
UFas on the 31st day of May» about a fortoighll
aner the fitisoner was oemmitked*

Were or weve not these the first hopes lint
were held out to biii).7--.Tbese wcra the firsst.
hopes I held out. On the 90th of May, I
caiiied examinatioqa to.be diawn. .

Mr. Attorn^ OeneraL — My lords,. I dp noi;

wre to ask any more questions, or that those
camminations sSpuU be given in evidence, os •
to ask what the contents of them weie, Th|9:
man made examinations, and afterwards would
sot abide by them. I leave it to the Court
and the prisoner's comnad to say, whether they
should be read. I am inclmed tb ^ink they
«ra not aduissf hie.

The Earl of Carhampton cross-examined by

imr.M'Naify.

The first day your lordship went to Car^,
he made no confession ?— No.

Some days after, the deputy eaoler calledL
and told you the prisoner wanted to see you r
-^He did, and that be believed he intended to
tell all he knew.

Did the vnder-gaoler assign any reason
upon which be formed that mlief ?— He did
not; Ididnotask him; I fii^wed him di-
rectly lo tne prison.

It roav have come to your lordship's know-
ledge, that from the situation of Dunn in the
gaol, no had access to the different prisoness ?
"T^V^ caiainly has.

Then of course he had access to Carty^
whenever he- pleased ?— Certainly.

Dbyou npt believe, that after the first time
you were with Carty, Dunn, the under-gaoler^
went frequently into his cell for the purpose the 7 th of May, being rather in liquor, he was

893]

S8 GSORGB III.

Titoi qfPiUrkk CaHjfJor $tmsfiring [896

brouj^bt hj Dunn, the smith, to the house of
Maurice Dunn, the house of a publican in
Strand-street; that he was there introduced
to a number of persons, the names of several
of whom he did not know

Did he name any ?— He named Broderick,
Martin and Reily, and Ferris (he was the
chairman of the committee) and James Dunn.
He said, that aAer he had been introduced to
this company, an oath was tendered, purport-
ing to keep secret the purpose for which they
were concerned, which was, to murder lord
Carhampton. He said it was to be done in
yeomen's cloaths.

Was there a time and place mentioned ? —
He said, that the Sunday following was named
for the day.

Do you recollect whether he gave any and
what account of himself for the succeeding
week ? — He said, he had worked in the de-
mesne the following week ; that he had ap-
plied to Dunn to let him off.
. Did he state any thine with rej;ard to the
result of that application r — He did : he said
he must apply to the committee in Dublin.
He said, that on the following Sunday he went
to the same place in Strand-street, the house
of Maurice Dunn; that the same persons
were assembled there that he had seen the
Sunday before, and that it was determined to
postpone the execution of this murder. He
also stated that on his return from that meet-
ing he was arrested by lord Carhampton.

Did you see him on that Sunday ?— I did.

Whom did you see in company with him?
—James Dunn, the smith, and two others,
whose names I do not recollect

Where did you meet themf^In the
Phoenix-park, returning from Dublin.

Is the park the rc»d to Luttrelstown ?—
a is.

fThis witness was not cross^xamined. And
the case wa$ closed on the part of the
crown.]

FOR THE ParSOVEE.

Thomoi Carey produced the affidavits as in
the preceding case.

John CahiU examined by Mr. Curran.

Do you know James Ferris ?— I do.

Have you ever seen him write P— Very
oAen ; he was clerk to me two years.

Look at the name to that affidavit?— I am
not very clear of it: I never saw him write
bis name in that form.

Whose writing is the body of the affidavit ?
—It is iike Fems's writing ; but I cannot say
it is. .

Court.- -Can you form a belief, whether it
is or not?— I cannot.

Jama HiehoH examined by Mr. Curran.

Do ^ou know James Ferris P— I do.

Are you acquainted with his hand- writing ?
Is that his ? [showing him the affidavit],— I
bcheve it is Fcrris's ; it is very like his.

Did you ever give him permission to use
your name in a case of Kelly aeainst Farrell?
•^Never; he applied to me tor mypermis-
sioD, and I refused; I would not give him
permission upon any account

Jamet Hickton cross-examined by the Solicitor

General,

The partnership between you and' Ferris
did not go on ? — ^I never intended to enter '
into a partnership with him.

You had conversations with him upon the
subiect ?— He applied to me about it, and I
said I would consider of it ; afterwards I told
him I would not upon any account.

This was af^r the transaction respecting'
Kelly ^— It was.

How soon afier that transaction dkl you
discover that he had used your name? — The
rooming after. I was told of it and was roucli
surprised, for I had forbid him, and I told the
gentleman I would immediately avow it.

Did you ever make use of Ferris's name, or
act te attorney for him ?- —Never to my know-
ledge, except one time he applied to roe at
Kilmainham to fill a process for him.

Was the process agamst Ferris himself?—
It was.

He employed you to fill a process against'
himself?— Yes.

Court. — Upon what occasion was that ?— I
do not know — I believe it was to save his
goods ; but there "was no decree made upon it.

Mr. Solicitor General, — ^Was there ever any
process served to obtain a decree ?— Upon my '
oath I do not know • I gave him the process.

You sisned a consent for a decree ? — I be- *
lieve I did

Coar^— I thought you said no use was'
made of the process ?— No use was made of
it, roy lord.

(The affidavit of the Srd of February, 179r,
was here read, as in former case, tide
page 867.]

Edward Smith Farrell examined by Mr.

Greene,

Your name is F^ward Smith Farrell ?— My
name is Edward Farrell.

Court — You said formerly your name was
Edward Smith Farrell N-So it is; I some-
times use the name Smith, it was my mother's
name.

Mr. Greene, — Do you know James Ferris?
—I do.

When did your acquaintance with him
commence ?-- Some time in 1795.

You employed him in an action of assault'
and false imprisonment? — I employed him-
and Lendrum, his partner.

What was the event ? — I was nonsuited.

Was there any affidavit or writing, purport*
ing to be an affidavit prepared for setting aside*
that nonsuit?— There wIeis.

Who prepared that writing ?— James Ferris/

In whose name did it purport to be sworn f
—He put the name Edward Smith to it.

897]

to Murder Lard Carhampton,

A. D. 1797-

[89S

Did he know what Edward Smith, or tell
you ? — He did not say whether he did or not.
• Ha4 you any conversation with him relative
to such person ?~^o, never.

. Was there any use made of that writing
afterwards ?-^There was a notice served upon
the foot of that writing to set aside the non-
suit. ^

Who had upon that occasion acted as the
attorney ?—Lendrum ; for the partnership
was dissolved. Ferris sent the notice bv roe
to Lendrum to put his name to il^ whicL he
did accordingly.

Did you ever see a promissory note made
by one Coonan to Sylvester Farrei), who then
lived in Britain-street ? — I did ; Ferris had it.

Did he say for what purpose i — He said, he
got it to mark a writ upon it against Coonan
«t the suit of Farrell.

When you first saw it was it indorsed I — It
was not.

Was it indorsed in your presence? — It was
by Ferris : I said it was of no use, not being
stamped ; but he said, it was before the stamp
act.

For what purpose did he say, he wrote
the name Sylvester Farrell ?— He said, that
the drawer might suppose I got it for payment,
and I was to make the b^st hand I could
of it.

Did he indorse it freely and at onje ? — No,
he made three attempts upon rough paper,
before he attempted tne note.

Do you know Owen Reily ?— Yes, he li ved
in Barrack- street.

Were you in company with him and Ferris
at any time with regard to a certificate P — ^Not
in Barrack-street, i»ut at the back of the four
courts, at Morgan-place.

What did Reily wish to have done? — I pan-
not tell; but Ferris filled the body of the
paper.

Did it require any oath ?— It was necessary
to be sworn before an alderman ; it w-as in
part print, and Ferris filled up the rest in writ-
ing.

Did he fill up the entire ? — Every thing ex-
cept the alderman's name.

Did you see the alderman's name put to it ?
— He had no objection I should .see him put
the name; but lie had an objection to the
other seeing him, and he desired us both to
go out, lest one should be jealous of the
other.

Did you go out ?— Yes.

Did you see the name after ?— Yes : When
I thought he had time to write the name, I
tapoedat the door, and he desired us to enter,
ana I saw the ink wet. «

Do you know any thing of an action against
Kelly?— Yes.

Was he in custody ?— Yes.

Did he eet out?— Yes.

Upon what occasion ?— Upon signing five
notes, and signine a release.

Who prepared Uiat release ?— Ferris.

Did you hear any thing of a rape?— Yes,

VOL, XXVI,

for it was that induced Kelly to execute the
notes, to get rid of the rape.

How old is he? — Sixty.

Was there any examination sworn? — ^No;
but there was one prepared in the hand-writ-
ing of Ferris, but it was not sworn.

Was that relative to the rape t — It was.

Whom did the information charge with the
ofience ? — Kelly.

The old man in custody? — ^Yes ; Ferris did
not appear at all, for I was his aid-du-camp
in the business.

Were you to communicate with Kelly?—
Yes.

What directions did you get?— To present
this draft of the information, in order to bring
him to a compliance to pay this sum of 50/.

Where was Ferris at that time ? — At the
house of Giles, the sheriff^s-officer.

Who was in company ? — ^The payee of the
notes and his wife..

Who was the payee ?— Edward Farrell.

Was there any drink ?— No, the business
was rather serious.

Can you undertake to say, positively, whe-
ther Ferris was privy to this charge ot a rape
against Kelly ?— At the beginning I under-
stood it was a fact, but afterwards I thoueht it
was not. Farrell bid me go up to Kelly, to
see if he had executed the security, which he
, had not, but said that if Farrell would ^o and
get him a bond he would. Farrell said, he
could not determine^ until he saw his attor-
ney. Then we went to Ferris, who said, the
bond would not do, as a bill might be filed.

By general repute is Ferris a man deserving
credit upon his oath ? — I think not.

Edward Smith Farrell^ cross-examined by Mr.

Prime Serjeant,

How much inferior in guilt is the man who
would assist in all these facts you have men-*
tioned, to the man who would contrive them f
— Why, Sir, he was my law agent, and if you
had an attorney yourself, you might be led
into it

Which of the two do you think the best
man P — ^The receiver is as bad as the thief.

You had a very good opinion of Ferris,
when you employed him ? — I had.

You thought him a fair man ?— I thought
he understood the business better than the
common lun.

You thought he would do vour business
honestly? — I thought he would do it corn-

Did you mot exnect he would do your bi)si->
ness honestly and fairly P — I did.

Had you any suspicion of him, when you
saw an affidavit prepared in the nape of an-
other man P — ^I had a suspicion, when I made
no use of it. ^

Was not that affidavit fifed ?— It was.

Was that doing your business fairly, or com-
pletely P — It was.

It was a bad act P— It was; there is no harm
in retracting.

9 M

889]

sa GEORGE III*

Trial of Patrick Carty.

[900

You gr^ brouriit heie inmi the Manhaliea ?
—Yea.

You were in Newgate ?— Not for robbeij*

For 'what 2 — ^Ahassault.

How loog were you there?— From the 6th
of A pril to the 6th of May.

How long have you been in the Macshakea ?
•—Since that Ume.

Did you know Mr. Benison ?-— Yea.

And you know Mathew Cannon, an atlor-
i^y ?<— I did ; all honest men.

Had you any dealings with Benison? — I
bought a mare from him.

llow did you pay him ?'He is not paid yet.

What dTd }rou eive him ? — A bond.'

JDid you give him a note ?— Yes, a note of
DaCniel Smi£ of Kilcock.

Was it paid ? — No ; the drawer found it was
an accommodation notey and he would not
pilyit

Was there any other objeetion to it ?*^Yes ;
Smith' said I put his name to it, which was
ialse; he put it to it himself.

Were you ever at Kilcullenf-rl sold a mare
there fbt my father, I did not sell her, but oU
fered her for sale.

What became of her ?— -I sent to myftther,
and getting a sum of money, I left her at
grass there.

Was she a stolen mate?— She was 90t.

Was she kept as a stolen mare ?^-No.

Do you know a man of the name of Lawlcr \
—Several of that name.

Were you in gaol at the suit of a man. of
that name ?— I was, under a fiai.

There was no rape in that case ? bow did
you get out ?i— Putting in a rule of bail, uul
there was no cause shown.
' Do you believe the rule was served ?— I can-
not tell.

Do you believe it was ?— I believe it was,
or I could not set out.

What ift Jutwler's chriatiaQ name?—
ThomAa.

Where does he live ?— I cumot tell.

Where does his father Cve?— In Ballyu
aakill.

Is he married ?— I cannot tell*

Did any woinaiA live with him as his wife ?
-There did.

What was the fiu fer f— For taking ««^
his wife.

Who was your attorney ia that case 9— Mir
thew Cannon.

Were you ever in gaol at Carlow ^— I was ;
but not for robbery : it was an assault^ and
colonel Bruen mitigated my sentence.

l^u were present when Ferris put the name
Sylvester Farrell to the note ? that was doing
business completely and honestly ? — ^No.

Do you know Terence Gorman f — I did, and
more than me knew him.

Did you ever do any business for him ? did
you ever make an affidavit for him ?— No ;
except this, I made an affidavit of his being
in actual custody, as he was.

When did you see that lady, supposed to be
Lawler's wife ? — ^I saw her to 'day ; but it hap*
pened to be the case that she was my wife
first.

Bkikard MiU$ examined l^y Mr. EmmOt.

Do you know James Ferris ?— I do.

Was he attorney for you ?— He was.

In what suit r— With regard to 30/.

Is he a man to be believed upon his oath in
a court of justice P— I would not believe him.

Is he to be bcdieved ?«-! think not; he did
not act so to me.

BMhard Milk cippsa^examlned.

What way of life are you in ?— -A tayIor» in
High-street

How long have you lived there P— Ten year^
and have the neatest character for honesty of
any man in the parish.

That is what you say of yourself P-^Itii^ for
I can get the mstand laa^ gentleman in the
place to give ipc ft character*

[Here the evidence closed*]

The learned Judges charged the Jury, who
retired for about three quarters of an hour,
and brought in a verdict— Guzltt.

•These two prisoners, Jamea Dnmi| and
Patrick Carty, aflerwarda recdved sentence of
death, pursuant to which they were executed
IB Strand*street.

901]

Trial of Peter tinerljf.

A. D. I7d7.

t902

625. Proceedings on the Trial of Pjeter Finerty, upon an In-
dictment for a Seditious libel; tried at Dublin before
the Honourable William Downes, one of the Justices of
his Majesty*s Court of KJbg's Bench in Ireland, on Friday
December 22nd : 38 George III. a. d. 1797>

[tl&e newspaper published at Dublin in
the years 1797 and 1798, under the title
of" The Press," operated during its sftiort
existence, very powerfully upon the
minds -of the people. The conviction
and execution or William Orr on a charge
of administering unlawful oaths was a
tofic conUnually brought forward and
aoimadverted upon by the conductors of
iShis poblicatioD. In addition to the
letter of Marcns, the subject of the pre-
sent prosecution, I here insert from dif-
ferent Numbers of ** The Press,*' several
artieles relating to the case of Orr, and
which are not only interesting as con-
nected with'the present trial, but also as
displaying the general character of the
paper.

<* No. ^-^Thurtday, October 5, 1797.

••Wo have adthority to say, thaV the state-
ment which appeared in the Dublin pa-
pers of Mr. Orr having made a confession
of guilt, is from beginning to end false.
Tliat account originated m the Belfast
News Letter, a paper generally known to
be under court influence.

^ There is something unutterably heinous
in the meditation to ratify the doom of
an unfortunate man, when under sen-
tence of death. A forgery to this pur-
pose, is the blackest and foulest or all
forgeries. Imagination cannot conceive
a more hellish malignity, than that of
thus bearing ^se witness after trial in
order to close the grasp of the execu-
tioner upon hrs victim.

** We understand that application was made
to government, on behalf of the unfortu-
nate Mr. Ort. An answer wa^ given by
Mr. Secretary Cooke, yesterday evening,
to this efiect, * that he was sorry that, m
* the case of Mr. Orr, the law must take
' its course.^

''Notwithstanding the above unfavourable
reply, there is yet room for hope. Some
circumstances have transpFred, which
aflfordatrone reason to suppose that the
clemency orgovemment will be extended
to Mr. Orr/'

* Reported by WUliam Biditwgf, esq.
barrister at kw:

I

« i^o. 5.~ Saturday, October 7, 1707.

" An expresii has been dispatched to Car-
rickfergus, as we anticipated, containing
an order for respiting the execution of
Mr. Orr until Tuesday next.

<^ The tBse of this unfortunate gentleman is
peculiarly distressing. It is attended
with circumstance, which, in the minds
of sdl candid persons must be allowed to
h^Ve great weight. No motive should
ever induce us to interfere with the trans-
actions of courts and juries. But when
repentant^urors come forward to impeach
and invalidate their own decision; and
when the fate of a man generally known
and warmly esteemed in his own country,
depends upon such decision, it is the
doty of the press to throw every possible

. light on the afiBur. .

** It appears that four of the jurors have
voluntarily come forward, and made
solemn i&davits to this effect, after
mature deliberation: that when they
had retired to their room to deliberate
upon tne evidence given against Mr.
Orr, li()uor was introduced, ana instead of
Weighing and comparing circumstances,
they proceeded to drink, and to such a
degree that there was almost a general
itltoxiCalion. In this state one of the
jurors used threats in order to intimidate
the rest He charged them with iiar-
bouring disloyal pnnciples, and should
they refuse to join them in bringing in a
verdict fining Mr. Orr guilty, he de-
nounced vengeance ag^nst them. Und^r
the intimidation thos produced in the
room, the jury were led to assent to such
a verdict. But the four jurors above-
mentioned swear^ that even the menaces
made against their persons and dwellings
would not hsive seduced them to so cri-
minal an act, were it not for the liquor
which they had taken ; and from having
been imposed on by a representation that
Mr. Ofr's life was in no danger, as their
recommendation to mercy accompanying
their verdict, would infallibly procure
him the clemency of government. They
farther swear, that in their minds the
case was doubtful, which they stated even
in the vetdictits0lf;»

903]

S8 GEORGE m.

Trial ^ Peter Finerty

[904

*< This is the substance of an affidavit duly
made in open court by four of Mr. Orr's
jurors. It requires no comment. 'But if
farther matter were wanting to induce
the lord lieutenant, who is Mund to ad-
minister justice in merc^, to stay the
arm of the executioner, it ofiFers m the
confession of Wheatley, the principal
evidence agsunst him on the prosecu-
tion. This man has deposed on oath be*
fore a magistrate, that he felt great
compunction of conscience not only for
this crime which he had committed
against Mr. Orr, but for other crimes,
and that what he had alleged against Mr.

. ' Orr was false.

''It is far from our intention ever to be-
come the servile panegyrists of govern-
ment. But we must say, that their
conduct in this respect has been such as
must extort applause, as well from the
public, as those whose duty it is to look
with an eye of jealousy upon all their
actions. Whatever (he political princi-
i)les of lord Camden may be, he must
have imbibed Just notions of equity and

^ morals from his excellent father : and it
is utterly impossible, therefore, that he
can suffer the execution of a sentence to
take place, which was founded on such
a veraict, and that verdict in consequence
of acknowledged perjury."

^* No. 6.— rue^ifly, October 10, 1797.

" The situation of the much abused Mr.
Orr continues to interest the feelings of

, the public very much. We have nothing
to add to the authentic statement given
in our last, except that government have
granted a farther respite until Saturday
next ; and from the propriety uniformly
displayed by them in this affair, there can
be no doubt of their finally exercising the
best prerogative of the crown, in extend-
ing mercy to that unhappy gentleman.

" Mr. McCartney was the magistrate who
brought the affidavits in Mr. Orr's case
to town, and laid them before govern-
ment."

"No. 7.— TAwwrfflv, October 12, 1797.

f* Another respite, we rejoice to hear, has
been granted to the injured Mr. Orr.
In the opinion of the public, who are so
particularly agitated and interested in the
fate of this individual, this is an act of as
much credit to government as of mercy
to the man. Several prints of Dublin
have copied from the Belfast News Let-
ter, which stated that IVtr. Orr had made
a confession of guilt — only one of them
(the Hibernian) has had the honour to
retract frum the error. They have lent
their arm to the stroke of the assassin
publicly, and they now go moping about
in the dark, and whispering every one
^h^t they meely such was the fact.

Nothing can be ftiore false. Mr. Orr
made no such confession. An innocent
or an honest man could have no such
•confession to make. The confessions
are all on the other side. The orosecu-
tor has confessed thix he haa sworn
falsely; the jury have confessed that
they acted inconsiderately; and for our
part, we confess, that as circumstances
appear should Mr. Orr suffer, soing out of
the world he may say in the language of

* the Messiah— Forgive them father, for

* they knew not what they did.' "

« No. 9.— Tttciday, October 17, 1797-

^* Notwithstanding the extraordinary cir-
cumstances which- occurred in the case
of Mr. Orr, to arrest the arm of the law,
and rescue the life of a much esteemed
man from what has the appearance of a
most flagitious conspiracy, we learn,
with deep regret that he suffered at Car-
rickfergus on Saturday last.

<* Since such has been the inavertable fate
of Mr. Orr — since such has been the
inexorable determination of those who
hold the sword of justice in Ireland, what
is become of that most sacred principle
of coronary discretion, that brightest gem
in the royal diadem, the sacred and
awful dutv of executing justice with
mercy, that revered and invaluable
axiom, so lon^ the boast of our jurispru-

. dence, < that it were better an hundred

* guilty persons should escape puniah-
' ment, than one innocent man should

* suffer,' or what shall we say of a power
so concupiscent of victims, that not even
the repentant declaration of abused and
prejudiced iurors, not even the remorse*-
fui acknowledgments of a perjured wit-
|iess to the falsehood of his own testi- .
mony, on which the verdict against Mr.
Orr reverted, cannot soothe to temper-
ance, to mercy.

« From the tyranny and persecution of
proud and unfeeling aristocracy ; from
military outrage, and magisterial oppres-
sion, the Irish subject stiU consoled him-
self, in the hope of an asylum under the
sacred privilege of trial by jury, and
looked for a sanctuary against prejudke
and malevolence, even then in the benign
and dispassionate exercise of royal cle-
meney; but after the lamentable fate of
Mr. Orr, who will rest on such hopes P
Venerated shade of the immortal Cam-
den, can such baleful fruits grow under
the auspices of thine house, from that
constitution and these laws which you
have so ably taught us to revere P

''The following is the dyino declaration
of Mr. Orr, as it came to us :

To THE Public.

" Afy friends and countrymen; In the
thirty-first year of my life, I have bee^

905]

^fiit a SedUiaus Libd.

A. D. 1797.

^30&

sentenced to die upon the gallows, and
this sentence has heen in pursuance of a
Terdict of twelve men, who should have
been indifferently and impartially chosen ;
how far they Have been so, I leave to
that country from which they have been
chosen, to determine ; and how far they
have discharged their duty, I leave to
their God and to themselves. They
have in pronouncing their vprdict thought
proper to recommend me as an object of
numane mercy; *in return, I pray to
God, if they have erred, to have mercy
upon them. The judge, who condemned
me, humanely shed tears in utterine lAy
sentence ; but whether he did wi8ely» in
so highly commending the wretched
informer who swore away my life, I
kave to his own cool reflexion, solemnly
assuring him and all the world, with my
dying breath, that the informer was
forsworn. The law under which I suffer,
is surely a severe one ; may the makers
and promoters of it, be justified in the
integrity of their motives and the purity
. of their own lives ; by that law, I am
stamped a felon, but my heart disdains
the imputation. My comfortable lot and
industrious course of life, best refute the
charge of being an adventurer for plun-
der ; but if to have loved my country,^
to have known its wrongs, to have felt
the injuries of the persecuted CatRolics,
and to have united with them and all
other religious persuasions, in the most
•orderly and least sanguinary means of
procuring redress ; if those be felonies, I
am a felon, but not otherwise. Had my
counsel Tfor whose honourable exertions
I am inaebted) prevailed in their motion
to have me trica for high treason, rather
than under the Inturrection law^ I should
have been entitled then to a full defence,
and my actions and intentions have been
l)ettcr vindicated ; but that was refused,
and I must now submit to what has
passed.

^ To the ^nerous protection of my coun-
try, I leave a beloved wife, who has been
constant and true to me, and whose grief
for my fate has already nearly occasioned
her death. I leave five living children,
who have been my delight-^may they
love their country as I have done, and
die for it, if needful.

^Lastly, a false and ungenerous publica-
tion having appeared ifi a newspaper,
stating certain alleged confessions of guilt
on my part, and thus striking at my re-
putation, which is dearer to me than life,
I take this solemn method of contradict-
ing that calumny: I was applied to by
the high sheriff, and the rev. William
Brisiow, soverei^ of Belfast, to make a
confession of guilt, who used entreaties
to that effect; this I peremptorily re-
cused; did I think myself guilty, I should

be free to confess it, but, on the contrary,
I glory in my innocence.

^ I trust, that all my virtuous country-
men will bear me in their kind re-
membrance, and continue true and
faithful to each other, as I have been to
all of them. With this last wish of my
heart, not doubting of the success of that
cause for which I suffer, and hoping for
God's merciful forgiveness of such of-
fences as my frail nature may have at any
time betrayed me into, I die in peace and
charity with all mankind.

Carrickfergut Gaol, October 5, 1797*

William Obb.

" Extract of a Letter from Carrickfergus,

October 14.

*' The inhabitants of this town, man, wo-
man, and child, quit the place this day,
rather than be present at the execution
of tbeir hapless countryman, Mr. Orr.
Some reifioved to the distance of many
miles. — Scarce a sentence was inter-
changed during the day, and every face
presented a picture of the deepest melan-
choly, horror, and indignation. The mi-
litary who attended the execution, con-
sisted of several thousand men, horse
and foot, with cannon, and a company of
artillery — the whole forming a hollow
square. To Uiese Mr. Orr rewA his dying
declaration, with a clear, strong, manly
tone of voice — and his deportment was
firm, unshaken, and impressive, to the
last instant of his existence. He was a
. dissenter, of exemplary morals, and ,of
most industrious habits ; and in the cha-
racters of husband, father, and neighbour,
eminently amiable and respected. The
love be bore his country was pure, ar-
dent, and disinterested ; spuming all re«
ligious distinctions ; and his last accents

• articulated the prophetic hope that Ire*
land would soon be emancipated."

« No. 10. Thursday October 19, 1797.

'* Exact Statement <^ the Trial of Mr.

Orr, taken down by an eminent Stenogra'

pher,

<<The public has heard much, for some
time past, of the sentence upon Mr. Orr ;
several detailed accounts have been given
of his trial, and of the circumstances at-

« tendingit, all of them, in some respects,
erroneous. The objections that were
made to his condemnation, in point of
law, had, in the opinion of many persons,
considerable force; it is however, cer-
tain, that in the opinion of the very able
court, that presided at his trial, they had
little or no weight. Tlicre were also
some circumstances, of a very peculiar
and extraordinsuy nature, attenaing his
conviction, which many persons nave
thought, if they were not of such a nature
as to prevent sentence of death from be-

907]

38 GEORGE lU.

Trial ^PeUr^dterty

C90B

iog passed upon bhn, ought to have pre-
veoted that sentence from being carrbd
into execution. It isi however, now very
certuOy that the humane and enlightened
nobleman who is entrusted with the pre-
rogative of the crown in this country, nas,
after much consideration, thought other-
wise. It will not, we think, be unaccept-
able to our readers, to be presented with
as faithful a summary as we have been
able to collect of that trial, and particu-
larly of the legal objections that were of-
fered to the C>>urt, during the course of
it, and in arrest of judgment.

^ Mr* Orr was indicted upon the statute of
the 36th year of the present king, com-
monly odled the Insurrection act, for
having feloniously administered an oath
to a man of the name of Wheatly, not to
divulge the secrets of a certain society,
then and there (that is at a certain time
and place specified in the indictment)
formed ; and also for having feloniously
administered an oath to the same
Wheatly, not to disclose the secrets of a
certain Society or brotherhood, formed
under the name of United IiiBbmen^ for
seditious purposes^ .

f< Wheatly was the firat witness, and the
substance of his evidence was, that he
was a soldier in a fencible regiment ; tliat
he was conducted to the house of the pri-
soner; that the prisoner thereupon im-
mediately seat' wit, and summoned a
meeting of persons, who forthwith as-
eembled at his house, and formed a com-
mittee, of which Uie prisoner acted as
president; that the prisoner administered
an oaih, to be true to the brotherhood,
and to keep* their secrets in defiance of
hope, or fear, or reward, or even deaUi it-
self; that the prisoner informed him that
the object of the society was, to put an
end to religwus differences— to restore
the liberty of the c&untry— to dOfect a
parliamentary reform, if possible, by fair
means, if not, by force; that the com-
mittee proceeded ;to debate on the reso-
lution of joinine* the French when they
should land — of providing arms for that
purpose— some o3f which arms they show-
ed to the witness— and of totally subvert-
ing by force of arms the constitution now
estaUlshU ; that at the same time they
showed a deep well to the witness, apd
asked him whether that would not be a
nice place for the aristocrats^

<* One other witness, he also a soldier in
the same'regimenty swore to the admi-
nistering the oath by the prisoner; but
had no reooUection of the substance of
it^ nor of an^ thing partkular that had
passed at that .committee. This was the
whf^ substance of the evidence on the
pact of the prosecution. .

** The counsel for the. prisoner (Mr. Garran I
and Mr. Sampson>> conlendM thai the

Juiy should be discharged^ of the indict-
ment, or that they should be directed to
acquit the prisoner. In support of this
objection it was said, that the testimony
of the informer must be supposed to be
true; and if it was true, the suilt
which it proved was not a crime of fe-
lony under the Insurrection act, but a
crime of high treason under the statute
of Edwar^ drd. To meet deliberately, and
resolve upon armins and joining an in-
vadinjg enemy, in ue subversbn of the
constitution, might not perhaps be an
overt act of compassing the king's death ;

' but it was clearly an overt act of le^ne
war within the 95th of Edward 3rd. This
no lawyer could controvert; the charge
was therefore a charge of high treason,
for which the prisoner could not l^ally
be tried under thb form of indictment.
A man chargied with high treason in
Great Britain has advantages of defence
which makes it almost impossible for an
innocent man to &U a victim to the mere
maUce of persecution; be must have a
copy of the indictment; the overt acts

. must be expressly charged ; the blasted
breath of one venal informer cannot de-
stroy him. In that cotmtiy there must
be two witnesses at the least. Even in
Ireland, where life does not seem to be of
so much value, the man accused of trea*
s6n has advantages peculiar to his situa*
tion ; he is entitied to an exact copy of
his charge, and a full defence by his coim-
sel in point of law and in iact. The state
must avow itself as the prosecutor — ^it
cannot wage a piratical war asainst his
lifo, under false colours ; and irit prose-
cutes him malieioitsly, he is authorized
by his counsel to disjday every cirtum^
stance of'his case to* his jury, wid of ap-
pealing to every sense of their duty, their
justice, their humanity, and their danger
fon his protection. To try bkn^ there-
fore, under thisacti which gavo him none
of those advantages, was to try him with-
out hearing faim; and was an oppression
imwarranted hj the law^ of the land.
This objection, it was said, micht appear
at first sight to be novri and hazardous.
As to its novelty, it was the first time that
sueha proceedmg' was ever attempted,
and the objection to it must be therefore
new. ' It mieht certainly- be thought des-
pente to seek areftige from a charger' of
felony, under tike law of treasOD-*-and it
was only to beJamented tfattt the melan-
choly state ofthe country SO fully justified
such a conduct.

'' Lord Yehrerton and judge Ghatnberlain
overruled the objection; whereupon a
man of the name of M'Claverty was call-
ed by the prisoner. Who contradicted ex-
pressly some parts of the evidence which
'Wheatly had given upon his crostf-exa-
mination-^in.order thereby to in^^each

0093

far a Sedkiotu LibeL

A. D. 1797.

mo

his credit. Two or thret other persons
were also examined for the same pur-
pose. The Court summed up the evi-
dence minutely, and left the considera-
tion of the credit due to the witnesses
entirely to the J[ury— who retired about
six in the evening to consider of their
▼erdict— About seven the Court adjourn*
edL The jury Mt up all night. About
six in the morning the court was opened
by lord Yelverton solely— and as we are
informed, the Jury then required to know
whether they might not find some quali-
fied verdict, of the prisoner's having ad-
ministered an unlawful oath^ which
should not afiect the life of the prisoner.
^' Lord Yelverton, as we ^re informed, di-
rected them that they must find a general
verdict of gUilty or not guilty. We ought
to mention in this place, that whether
this was the precFse answer which his
lordship gave, or whether be accompanied
it with any and what observations, we.
cannot presume to state with certainty,
as there, was no gentleman of the law
present at that early hour. The jury
again retired, and in some short time re-
turned with a verdict of guilty, but re*
commended the prisoner to mercv.
Lord Yelverton told them that he would
transmit their recommendation to ^o-
vemmen4» but that he could premise
nothing as to its success. During the
whole of the trial the silence and anxiety
of a crowded audience were singularly
solemn and striking; the general cha-
racter of the prisoner, his numerous
family^ the great beauty and manliness
of his person, and the quiet fortitude
which he displayed, when contrasted with
his accusers^ seemed to excite a genend
interest' in his favour.

** On the next day Mr. Orr was brought into
Court to receive sentence, and his counsel
then made a motion in arrest* of judg-
ment, which he supported upon near^
the foHowing grounds : tfar indictment
he sud was utterly vague and uncertain;
he cited Hawkins's Pleas of the Crowlr,
▼oL 9, p. S90i

'^To show that In all indictments, the
special manner of the whole fact oueht
to be set forthi wKh such certainty, that
It mi^ judicially appear to the Court,
that the indietors have net •gone upon in-
sufficient premises, Mb also cited the fol-
lowing psosa^ from the same book,
p« 864: 'Neither doth it seem to be
• * always suffitient to • pursue' the very
' words of the statute, unless by so doing,
' youlully, directly, and expressly allege
' the fact, in the doing or not doing*

* whereof * the* ofience consists, without
' any the least uncertainty and ambiguity;
'for It hath been a^jiKlged^', that -an in-

* distment for perjuiy on Sr Elis. c. 9,

* settings fer^, that 'the tlofcndant' taeto

* ptru Macro etangeth/alid depomit^ &c.

* is not good without directly showing

* tliat he was sworn. Also it hath been

* adjudged, that an information on the

* 18 Hen. 6, c. 17, for not abating so much

* of the price of wine sold, as the vessels
' wanted of the statute measure, is insuffi-

* cient, if it do not expressly show how

* much they wanted. Also it is said,

* that an indictment on the statute of

* usury, setting forth, that the defendant

* took more than five in the hundred, is
' not good, without showing in particular
'how much.* He insisted, that another
known principle of law was, that a jury,
i^hether grand or petit, oould answer
only to questions of faeti and that the
Court was to answer to questions of law ;
the question therefore he sM was,
whether within those rules the present
indictment was sufficient, and whether if
thtf prisoner had demanded or pleaded
guilty, the Court could pronounce jude«
ment upon it ; to examine this, he said,
it was indispensably necessary to consider
that the oflence within the stattite, upon
which the present indictment was framed,
was a compound offence, consisting-of the
administering an oath without authority,
which is a roisdemeanbr at common' law,
and consisting also of the' additional cir-
cumstance here charged, of its being an
oath not to divulge or discover the secrets

* of a certun society formed, as the indict-
ment alleges it, for seditious' purposes ;
the former part, namely, the mere ad-
ministerine an- oath, could* not be an
offence witnin this statute, fbr then the
administering the obligation of a friendly
brother, or free^mason, would l>e a
capital felony within this act, which the
Court had expresshr denied^ and" which no
roan could be so absurd' as tO' assert ; the
fact therefore which could' abne touch
the life of theprisoner, was whether the
society in question was a society formed
for seditious purposes ; what; he asked,
was a purpose ? it might be a design good
or bad already executed, or intended to
be executed; but what was a seditious
purpose ? to answer* this, it' roust be
ariced what is sedition? as* a description
of an offence he reKed upon it; that no
lawyer could, in the abstract, answer
what it warn

<* If any man doubted this^ let hln< suppose
a person indicted for tieiftg a seditious
inan, for doing a seditious act, or for en-
gaging in a seditious purpose, without
stating more ; could any court of' law
know what' sentence to pronduofce upon

. himf Now, said he,« if to allege that a
man waa engaged in a seditious purpose,
is void, because of uncertainty, so to al-
lege that a society was fohbed for Sedi-
tious purposes, is equally uoceitsih * but
it might be said,- that theindidttntot puN

9U]

38 GEORGE III.

Trial of Peter FineHy

[912

sues the statute ; but it mieht be said»
the grand jury found that the purposes
-were seditious -. his answer to that was,
whether the purposes were seditious or
not, was the very point upon which the
life of his client turned, which the grand
jury can find only as a matter of fact,
that is by stating what the purposes were,
and not as a matter of law, to which
they were incompetent to answer ; they
should have found that it was a society
formed for seditious purposes, and shoula
have gone on and statea what those pur-
poses were in point of fact, in ordcff that
the Court might, according to the lan-
guage of the book, determine whether
the indictors had or had not eone upbn
sufficient premises ; instead of doing so,
as they should have done, they had utterly
suppressed the fact, and had given their
opmion of its legal criminality by a term
which no lawyer can understand; as the
abstract for sedition may be applicable to
words or to acts. Now, continued he,
give me leave to ask your lordships, is
the purpose stated a seditious one P I will
admit that ten thousand purposes may be
seditious, and I will require in return, to
have it admitted to me, that there may
be only one purpose not seditious. I
ask how does it appear to the Court on
the indictment; that the grand jury have
not given the epithet of seditious to that
one only purpose to which it is not ap-
plicable ; I say therefore, that you can
pronounce no judgment upon this indict-
ment, unless j^ou found your judgment
upon a conclusion in matter of law, made
by a grand jury, which conclusion it is
not competent for them to make; and
unless you also make that conclusion a
ground' upon which you may intend a
matter of fact, which a court of law cannot
do in any criminal case whatever.

*^ He then cited the following passage from
Hawkins, vol. 8, p. 320, as an illustration
of his reasoning : an indictment finding
that a person hath feloniously broken
prison, without showing the cause of his
imprisonment, &c. by which it may ap-
pear that it was of such a nature, that
the breaking might amount to felony, is
insufficient. This case he insisted was
directly in the point ; it was a compound
offence, first a breach of prison, and next
a breach of prison b^ a person charged
with a felony, in which it is not enough
that a grand jury shall say it was a
felonious breaking, because that would
be answering to a question of law, but
th^ must set out the fa(;t, namely what
the offence was, in order that the Court
minr see whether they have found upAn

I sufficient premises. So here, he said, he
relied upon it, that the grand jury should
liave found distinctly what the purpose
was, la order that the Court might judge

whether it was seditious or not. Upon a
former occasion, he said, he had heard
this objection answered, by saying that
the grand jury had found, that the oath
was maliciously administered, but this
answer he said was certainly refuted by
the case he had just cited, which shows
that a general averment, that a fact was
of a particular nature or quality,«is not
sufficient in an indictment, without the
finding of theveiv fact itself. May I be
permitted, said he, having appealed to
the written law, to appeal less techni-
cally to the common sense and reason of
mankind. What is the statute on which
you are deciding ? An act made on the
spur of the ^ccasion, creating crimes and

1>uuishments heretofore unknown to our
aw ; should it not therefore be construed
withthe utmost possible strictness ? But
what is the indictment itself? It is a
charge made by a grand jurv of coantnr
gentlemen, who are selected by a sheriff,
who is nominated by the crown which
prosecutes, and at a moment when the
question of parliamentary reform has
shaken the tranquillity of this country to
its centre. Is it extravagant to suppose
that such a jury might consider any
union of men for effecting a reform as
seditious ? give me leave to ask how it
appears from this indictment, that a
mere parliamentary reform, was not the
seditious purpose which the grand jury
has in this case thought proper to pre-
sent ? He next proceeded to submit to
the court, that the act itself was not in
force : and first, he cited the authority of
Hale and Hawkins, to show that it an
offence be committed against a statute,
which statute is afterwaras repealed, no
proceedings can be had asainst the of-
render ; and he contended that there was
no distinction between a statute repealed
and a statute expired : they were equally
the existing law, as long as they were in
beine, and the principle he sidd was ap-
plicable to both cases, namely, that the
execution of all laws, is not for the sake
of vengeance, but for the sake of preven-
tion and oxample, which are equally in-
applicable to a statute expired, as to a
statute repealed. Tb^mind of the judge
he said, is the repository of the law that
does exist, not of the law that did exist ;
nor does the mercy and justice of the law
know of so disgraceful an office as a
judge becoming a sort of administrator to
a dead statute, and collecting the debts of
blood that were due to it in its lifetitne.
The single question, therefore, he said,
was whether the act inquestion was then
actually expired or not, and this question
turned upon the construction of the last
section of the act, which says, ' this act
' shall be in force until the first day. of
^ January, 1797. and to the end of the

i

fl3]

Jbf a SeHHaui

A. D. 17^.

[914

' oex% wemon of pftrliame&t, ai)d no lon-
' eer/ Tbis act, said he, was pa89ed in
Marchi 1796, and was avowedly a mere
experimental statute, deeply trenching
upon the known principles of iurispru-
dence, and avowealy not intenaed to t>e

J)ermanent law ; the construction there -
ore that abridges it, is a construction in
its own spirit, and I trust I may be al-
lowed to sa^ that the most humane and
rational of its pfbvisions is that by which
it provides for the shortness of its own
duration : the words next session there-
fore have reference to the session in
which it was passed, and mean the ses-
sion w])ich expired with the dissolution of
the last parliament ; it was clear, he said,
that ^ next session' could not mean tbe
Hession next after the first of January,
1797; had that been the meaning, it
would have been expressed in the ordi-
nary way, by adding the verb of time
'then,' which woulahave fixed the rela-
tion of the words, ' next session ' to the
first of January, 1797 ; suopose, he said,
the legislature had been asked in March
1796, how long is the statute to be in
force f would it not have answered, until
the end of the session af^er the present?
had it been asked when that next session
was likely to begin and to end, would it
not have answered, the parliament for
years past has met about tne twentieth of
January, the next session will therefore
begin about that time, and will end early
in tbe summer.; it was therefore, he said
clear, that the full time assigned to this
act, in the idea of the legislature itself,
was expired ; but what is it, said he, that
gives even a colour for contending that
It is yet in force? Tha extraordinary and
unforeseen metting of our parliament in
October last ; tbe question is therefore
simply whether a law of blood is .to be
kept alive by a construction ivunded
merely upon such an event ? Let it be re-
pienibered^ said be» that I am not arguing
in a civil case, in which ajudgepay con-
jecture, this is a criminal case, in which
a reasonable doubt ought to stop the
judge and save the prisoner. The Court
declared, that they did not think the ob-
jections valid, and therefore refused to
arrest the judgment; shortly after, and
before Mr. Orr was remanded, his counsel
stated, that a most extraordinary event
bad just come to their knowledge, and
which they thought it their duty to ap-
prize the court of; two of theturors had
made an afiBdavit, stating, that on the
nij^tof the trial, a considerable quantity
or spirituous liquour was conveved into
the^ury room, and drank b^ the jury,
many of whom were greatly intoxicated,

Sid threatened the two jurors who made
e affidavit, and who admitted them-
selves also to have been in a state of in-
VOL. XXVT.

'toxication, to prosecute tliem as Vniied
Iruhmen^ if they did not concur iu a ver-
dict of guilty ; and that at Jeneth, worn
out by fatigue and drink, and subdued by
nienaces, they did, contrary to . their
judgment, concur in that veraict ;-<-here
the counsel were interrupted by Mr. Jus-
lice Chamberlain, who declared that such
a statement ought not to be permitted;
that it was evidently calculatea to •throw
a discredit upon the verdict, and could
not be the foundation of an;^ motbn to
the Court. The counsel, said* that they
did not mean to make it the ground of a
motion ; that they did intend, had the
Court permitted it, to move that the jury
should be puni&hed for their misconduct;
that as to discrediting the verdict, if such*
misconduct of tbe jury could discredit it,
it was only justice to the public and to tlie
prisoner that it should be discredited :
that as to themselves they had discharg-
ed their duty, to the best of .their judg-
ment, and submitted. Mr. Orr was then
remanded ; and on tbe next day lie was
again brought up, when^lord Yelverton in
a very solemn and pathetic mann^ pro-
nounced sentence of death upon him ;
during the latter part of it, his lordship's
voice was scarcely articulate, and i|t the
close of it he burst into tears ! Mr. Orr
(immediately after sentence) beggecl leave
to say a few words : my lords said he;
that jury has convicted me of being a
felon ; my own heart tells me tliat their
conviction is a falsehood, and that I am
not 8 felon ; if they have found mc so,
improperly, it is worse for them than for
me — Jor I can forgive them. I wish to
say only one word moroi and that, is, to
declare upon this awful occasion, ifnd in
• the presence of God, that the evidence
against me was grosslv perjured, grossly
and wickedly perjurecf."

'< No. IS. nmrsday, October 26, 1797.

** To HIS ExCELtENCY THE LORD LlEU-

TBKANT.

"My lord; — I address vour excellency on
a subject as awful and iuterestiog as any
that hath engaged the feelings of this
suffering country. The oppression of
an individual leads to tbe oppressk>n of
every member in the state, as his death,
however speciously palliated by tomis,*
may lead to the death of the constitution.
Your lordship already anticipates me^
and vour conscience has told you, that I
allude to the circumstance of Mr. Orr,
whose case every man has now made his
own, by discovering the principle on
which Mr. Pitt sent you Xo execute im
orders in Ireland.

'* The doath of Mr. Orr, the nation has pit>-
nounced one of the most sanguinary and
savage acts that iiad disgracS the laws.

3^

9151 88 GEORGB 01.

In peijury^did you not hear, mj Ibrdy'the
▼eraictwasgttenf Penurj, accompanied
vith terror, as terror has marked every
step of ^our gorernment ; vengeance and
desolation were to fall on those who would
not plunge themselves in hlood. These
were not strong enough : against the ex-

^ press law of the land, not only wais drink
mtroducedto the jury, but drunkenness it-
^Ify beastly and criminal drunkenness^
was employed to procure the murder of a
better man than any that now surrounds
jrou. "But well may juries think themselves
justified in their drunken verdicts^ if de-
nauched and drunken judges, swilling spi-
rits on the seat of justice Itself, shall set
the country so excellent an example.

^ Repentance, which is a slow virtue, has-
tened, however, to declare the innocence
of the victim. The mischief which per-
jury had done, truth now stept forward
to repair; neither waA she too late, had
humanity formed any part of your coun-
sels. Stung with remorse, on the return
of reason, part of his jury solemnly and
soberly made oath, that their verdict had
been given under the unhappy influence
of intimidation and drink ; and m the
' most serious affidavit that ever was made,
by acknowledging their crime, endea-
voured to a^one to God and to their
country for the sin into which they had
i>een seduced.

•*Thc informer too, a man, it must be
owned, not much famed for veracity, but
stung with the like remorse, deposed tibat
all he had formerly sworn was malicious
and untrue, and that from compunction
albne he was induced to make a full dis-
closure of his great and enormous guilt.
In this confession, the wicked man had
no temptation to perjury ; he was nol to
be paid for that ; be had not in view, ]ik«
another Judas, the thirty piecet ofHlver ;
if he was. to receive his reward, he knew
he miist not look for it in thU world.

** These testimonies were followed by the
solemn declaration of the dying man him-
self; and the approach of death is not a
moment when men are given to deceive
both themselves and the world ; good and
religious men are not apt, by perjury on
their death-beds, to close the gates of
lieaven against themselves, like those
^ ivbo have no hope. But if these solemn
declarations do not deserve regard, then
is there no truth injustice; and tnough
the innocence of the accused had even I
Temsdned doubtful, it was your duty, my
lord, and you had no exemption from
that duty, to have interposed your arm,
and saved him from the death that per-
jury, drunkenness, and reward had pre-
pared for him.

^ Let not the nation be told that you are a
passive instrument in the bands of
others; if passive you be, then is your

trial

[9I«

office a shadow Indeed ; if aQ active in-
stnmient, as you ought to be, you did
tH>t perform the duty which the laws re-
quired of yon--you did not exercise th«
prerogative of mercy— that mercy which
the constitution had intrusted to you for
the safety of the subject^ by guardme him
from the oppression of wickea men. Inno-
cent it appears he was; his blood has been
shed, ana the prec^ent indeed is awfid.

** Had Frazier and Ross been found guilty
of the murder committed on a harmless
and industrious peasant, lay your hand
to your heart, my lord, and answer, with-
out advisers, would vou not have par-
doned those ruffians r After the proof
you have given of your mercy, I must
suppose your clemency unbotmded. Have
no Orangemen, convicted on the purest
evidence, been at any time pardoned ? Is
not their oath of blood connived at?
Was not that oath manufacttired at the
command of power? and does not power
itself discipline those brirandsf Bat
suppose the evidence of Wheatly had
been true, what was the offence of Mr.
Orr ? Not that he had taken an oath of
blood and extermination^for then be
had not suffered ; but that he had taken
an oath of cluuity and of union, of huma-
nity, and of peace. He has suffered:
shall we then be told, that your govern-
ment will conciliate public opinion, or
that the people will not continue to look
for a better?

^ Was the unhappy man respited but to
torture him, to insult both justice and the
nation, to carry persecution into the bo-
som of his wife and children' F is this the
prerogative of mercy ? What would your
rather have sflid unto vou, had he lived to
witness this falling on: 'Son,' he would
have said, 'I am a father; I have a
* daughter; I have known misfortune;
' the world has pitied me, and I am not
' ungrateful.'

*' Let us explore the causes of this san-
guinary destruction of tb'e people. Is it
tnat you are determined to revenge the
regret expressed by them at the recall of

. your preuecessor ; and well knowing they
will not shed tears at the departure of his
successor, that ylii are resolved to make
them weep during jrour stay ? YeSp m^
lord, I repeat during y<mr May^ vat it
may not be necessary that a royal JBcht,
manned and decorated for the pui^pose,
should waft you from the shores of ah
angered and insulted country.

** Another cause : is it to be wondered that
a successor of lord Htzwilliam should
sign the death-warrant of Mr. Orr ? Mr.
Pitt had learned that a merciful lord-lieu-
tenant was linsuited to a government of
violence. It •was ho compliment to the
native clemency of a CavdeHi that he
iiMt you into Irfiand ; aiBd flrbat nai.oeen

»17]

^ a tMitima Uhd.

A. D. 1797.

[918

our portion tmd^ the change, but mas-
sacre and rape, military murders^ deso-
lation and terror \

'' Had you spared Mr. Orty you thought
perhaps the numerous 5imiues of those
vbom your admioiatration had devoted*
might accuse you of partiality: and thus
to prove your consistency, you are con-
tent to be suspected of waoting the only
/ quality iku countiy wiahea you to exr
erc!^

^ But, my lord, it will not dp— -though your
guards and vour soldiers, aud your
thousands and your tens of thousands,
should conduct innocence to death, it will
pot do— a yojce has cried in the wilder-
ness: and let the deserted streets of Car-
rickfergus proclaim to all the world, that
eood men will not be intimidated, and
VloX. they are yet more numerous than
vour soldiers.

** We are not Doniitian's pepple ; we are
not lopped at a blow ; but it looks as if
some ^te had doom^ us to be destroyed
one by one, as the Persian tyrant ordered
the hairs to be plucked from the tail of
his beast Beasts we 'have been, the
vil^ carriers of the vilest burthens that
the' vilest masters could lay upon us.
But the voke is shaken : persecution has
provoked -to love, an(| uwi^d Ireland
against foreign despotism.

^ Feasting in vour castle, in the midst of
your myrmiaons and bishops, you have
little concerned yourself about the ex-
pelled and miserable cottager, whose
dwellme, at the moment of j^our mirth,
was in names ; his wife and his daughter
then under the violation of some commis-
sioned ravager ; hb son agonizing on the
bayonet, and his helpless in^£ crying
in vain for mercy. These are lamenta-
tions that stain not the hour of carousal.
Under intoxicated counsels the constitu-
tion has reeled to its centre • justice her-
self is not only blind-drunk, but deaf,
like Festus, to ^ the words of soberness
* and truth.'

^ My lord, the people of Treland did hope
that mercy would not have been denied
to a most worthy and innocent man,
when they underlstood, that one of the
worst advisers and most imperious mem-
bers of your cabinet, had abandoned the
kingdom. Had be' beei> of your late^
counsels, the odium might have been di-
vided ; at present you have the best claim
to it. Let, however, the awful execu-
tion of Mr. Ort be a lesson to all unthink-
ing juries ; and let them cease to flatter
themselves that the soberest recommen-
dation of theirs andof the presidingjudge,
can stop the course of carnage which
sanguinaryi and I do not fear to say, vn-
coi^ili^iUioiiaJ lasm have ordered to be
loos^ s kt them remember that, like
ItfacDetBi ihe servants' of )be crown have

waded so far in blood, thai they find it
easier to go on than to £0 biick.
^ I am, my JUird, your ExceOenqy's humble
^rvanty Marcvs.''

^ No. 14.— Ss^iirioy, Oo<o&0r 88.

^ Tfl£ Marttuep Orb.

^ The actors in the foul conspiracy a^nst
the life and character of this devoted vic-
tim, are not content to letthe/cf i<l fame
of their black actions rot .into oblivion,
but by attempting to justiiy^ themselves
under specious appearances, and surrep-
titious testimonies, they tempt us to such
investigation, as shall make

' This fouldeed to siqell abpye the e^rib,
* Like carrion men groaning fbr bunal,''

To vilify the veracity of a man^ honour-
able and uprieht through life, ' m his last
and solemn dying declaration, find im-
plicate him in the giiilt of murdering his
own character — to weave for his perse-
cutprs a mantle of ioROQence, and cover
the stains of his blood indelible from
their hands ; a bold and flagitious asser-
tion is.made in Faulkner's Journal, and
the 9q}gM»t News Letter, f that the de-

* voteipl Mr. Orr confessed his jguilt, and
' acknowledged the justice oi his sen-

* tence ;' ana to bolster this impudent
lie, the letter ,of the honourable Chi-
chester 8keflington, and the reverend
William Bristow, is bfoueht forward, and
afterwards backed with uieir aii^datit by
way of co(/id/.

*^ But what do these gentlemen assert?
that they came abruptly through curiosity
into the cell, where Mr. Orr, awaited tli^
execution of an ignominious sentence,
that was to stamp his memory with dis-
grace, ahd tear nim for ever irom aa
amiable and affectionate wife, and five
darling children — and from family,friends,
and connections, with whom he lived in
long and mutual intercourse of esteem
aud respect.

^ They found him, they say, reading a re-
ligious book, inost probably absoroed in
deep and melancholy reSexi<Hi^ atrug-
gling t<f reconcile the feelings of nature
to the dictates of religion, and to resign
himself with manly calmness to his hard,
hard fate.

<< They protrude upon him abrupt and in-
sulting (|uestion8— thej talk to him of a

. paper iigntA tpUh hit wuntf which they
saw in the hands of the sherifi^, acknow-
ledging his njdlt— they congratulate him
on the consoUng peace of conscience such
a confession must have yitlded, and they
state a dialogue between Mr. Orr and
them, couchmg however their statement
under this cautipps Salvo, * or vordt to

* thai ^€cl.'— Now let any man candidly
read the answers of Mr. Orr, as stated J>y

910]

38 GEOBGE III.

Trial 0

Fimrljf

[920

them, and ask his judgment whether
they do not appear to be rather the dis-
creet and passive responses of a inan in
his awful situation, aispleased with the
cruelty and impertinence of such an ob-
tusion, but wishing to get rid of his vi-
sitants as civilly and as speedily as pos-
sible, rather than as any thing that could
be fairly construed into a confession of
guilt ?

^' But Mr. Skeffin^ton — ^Mr. Bristow, or Mr.
Anybody, may state what conversations

* they please with the unfortunate Mr. Orr.
They have not him to confront them ;
for alas ! he is gone ' to that .bourne,

* from which no traveller returns.' But
lo his last solemn dying declaration, we

' will now add the declaration of his bro-
ther, as an indelible record against them.
»-Tbe candid public may then foe fairly
asked,

' Utrum hontm maviSf accipe ;*

for our parts we will, as Hamlet says,
' take the Ghost*s word for a thousaadl'

To THE Public.,

^ In consequence of seeing a paragraph in
the Belfast newspaper, signed by C. Skef-
fington, .esq. higti sheriff of the county
of Antrim, and the reverend William
Bristow, sovereign of Belfast, relative
to the declaration of my late brother,
I am therefore induced, in justice to the
character of my brother and myself, to
lay the whole of that transaction before
the public. — ^A few days after my brother
was found guilty, and sentenced to die, I
went to Belfast and applied to many gen-
tlemen, for the purpose of using their In-
terest to have the punishment of my bro-
ther mitigated, and in the presence of
Mr. James Dickey, of RanJalstown, and
Mr. Thomas L. Stewart^ of Belfast, I ap-
plied to Mr. Staples, a member of par-
liament for this county, and the hon.
'William John Skeffington, for the above
purpose, who proposed, if I would get a
written confession of eui It from my bro-
ther, that they would sign a memorial
§0T the purpose of obtaining ^his pardon :
and the hon. William John Skeffington
said, ' he would co round the gentlemen

* of the Grand Jury, who were then
' most I v in Belfast, and get the memorial
■* signed by them.' • In consequence of
which I got sbwritten confession prepared,
before Ileft Belfast, and product it to
the hon. William John Skeffington, and
asked him ifit was full enough? to which
he aeree^r-^I accordingly went to Car-
rick fergus, aad applied to my brother to
si^n -the confession ^hich I produced to
him, telling him, * if he would sign it,

* the above sentlemen would sign a roe-
' roorial to obtain his pardon, aim get the

^ * rest of the Graad Jury to do so/— On

his reading the written confetsbn, bt
declared,' 'lie never would consent to
' sign a paper acknowledging his guilt and

* the justice of his sentence, as he was
^ not guilty of the crime he was charged

* with.' — ^Not being able to induce him
to consent to the above, I left him ; and
conceiving it would be of material use,
and be the means of saving his life — for
this purpose, and through tha^view, I
sigped, m his name, the confession of
guilt, entirely without the privity or con-
sent of my OTOther, and immediately re-
turned to Belfast, and delivered it to the
faon. William John Skeffineton, as the
act of my brother, with which, I believe,
he went round to the above gentlemen,
in order to obtain their signatures to the
memorial, which they refused. This was
the whole transaction, being entirely my
act, and not that of my brother, as he
4itterly refused. This 1 am ready to ve«
rify upon oath.

Javes Ore.
^ CeanJUId, October 17.

** Here then the black conspiracy comes
out. To execute a sentence of death,
founded on a verdict impeached on the
oaths of two of the jurv who found it, as
obtained under the influence of drunken-
ness and terror, and upon the evidence
of a witness who, in the bitterness of his
remorse, declares his perjury, would have
been too unseemly a procedure,^ even in
the pursuit of a favourite victim ; and
therefore an offer of mercy is held but,
but the price of that mercy is to be th»
confession of guilt; and a brother, armed
with all the force of fraternal affection.'
and the cries and prayers of a beloved
wife and children, is sent as the advo-
cate to exact that confession to save a
brother's life. But we now see, by the
testimony of that brother, that the
manly and virtuous victim scorned to
purchase the boon of mercy at such a
price. His brother, distracted between
grief and affection, supplies the defect,
and subscribes lo the conf^s&ion of guilt,
little aware, that instead of thereby saviujg
his broiler's life, he was sealing his
doom.

'' And this surreptitious declaration, thus
swindled from tne fears of an aflQicted fa-
mily, is made an instrument to intercept
the stream of mercy, and counteract even
the report of the judge who tried him,
and the disposition of that executive
power who is bound to execute justice
with mercy.''

'*No.lM. T^tuday Notemher 2i.

^ As the public have felt much interested
in every circumstance relating to the
much lamented Mr. Orr, we lay the fol-
lowing copy of a leHer written by him,
before them: *

Ml]

Jor a S€ditious Libd.

** Copy of a Letter written by WUUmn Om
farmer^ to the Lord lieutenant.

" May it please your Excellency; — Having
received from vour excellency's clemency
that respite from death which affords
me the opportunity of humt)ly and sin-
cerely thanking you^ I avail myself of the
indulgence of pen and paper, and of
that goodness which you have already
manifested towards me,, to contradict a
roost cruel and i^urious publication
which has been put into the newspapers,
stating that I had confessed myself g^uilty
of the most enormous crimes, which a
peijured and miserable wretch came
forwatd to swear against vtie. My lord, it
is not by the confession of crimes, which
would render me unfit for society, that I
expect to live — it is upon the strength of
that innocence which I will boldly main-
tain with my last breath, which I have
already solemnly affirmed in a decla-
ration I thought was to have been my
last, which I had directed to be publish-
ed as my vindication from infamy, ten
times more terrible to me than death. I
know, my lord, that mv own unhappy si-
tuation, the anguish of a distractea wife,
and the mistaken tenderness of an affec-
tionate brother, have been resorted to, to
prpcure that confession : and I was

fiven to understand my life would have
een spared me upon such conditions ; I
as decidedly refused, as I should now,
though your excellency's pardon should
be the reward. Judge then, my lord, of
the situation of a>man, to whom life was
offered upon other (Conditions than that of
a confession both false and base. And
lastly, let me make one humble obser-
vation to your excellency, that the evi-
dence should be strong indeed to induce a
conviction that an industrious man, en-
joying both comfort and competence,
who has lived all his life in due neigh-
bourhood, whose character, as well
as that of all his stock had been free from
reproach of any kind, who certsunly, if
allowed to say so much for himself,
would not shed the blood of auy human
creature, who is a husband and father of
a family, would engage himself with a
common soldier in any system which had
for its end robbery, murder, and destruc-
tion ; for such was the evidence of the
unfortunate witness, Wheat ly. If upon
these &jounds,and the fact» already sub-
mitted to your excellency, I am to be
pardoned,! shall not fail to entertain the
most datifiil sense of gratitude, for that
act of justice as well as mercy ; and in
the mean time humbly remain your ex-
cellency's &c. &c.

WiLLZAt Obk.
** Carrickfergui Gaol,

October 10th, 1797.'' -

• A. D. 1797. [922

<<No.dO. Tuesday December B.

'< The death of Mr. Orr is a topio that
should never be relin(}uished ; and we
now publish the affidavits made by three
of the jurors who tried that unfortunate
man. Certain as we art, that the public ^
must feel a lively interest in every thing
that coocems the sufferings of the roar-
tyred Orr, we feel ourselves happy in laj.
ing before our readers these impartial
documents of bis case. On these affi-
davits there needs no commeht^^they
speak for themselves — and every one
must allow them their full weight and
importance. We forbear therefore from
making any remarks upon them.

*' Affidavits OF tbe Juaoas.

'^ Arthur Johnston and Archibald Toropson
twoof the junr who were impanelled to
try William Orr, depose on . the Holy
Evaneelists, and say, that after they had
retired to their jury room to consider
their verdict, two bottles of very strong
whiskey spirits were conveyed into their
jurv room through the window thereof,
and given to, anathe greater part thereof
drank by the said jurors, some of whoin
became very sick and unwell, which occa-
sioned their vomiting before they gave
their verdict. And deponent Toropson
says, that he was by age and infirmity,
and intimidation used to him bv Mr.
James iM'Neighton, one of said jury,
induced to concur in said verdict con«
trary to his opinion

^ Sworn before me thu 20th of September
1797, in court, Yelvxstov.

*' Arthur JoHKsron.
*^ Abcb. Tompsov.

^ George Crooks, of Innischcloughlin, in
the county of Antrim, farmer, maketh
oath, and saith, that he, this deponent,
was one of the jury who was on the trial
of William Orr, who was charged with
administering oaths. Deponent saith,
he was resolved to acquit toe same Wil-
liam Orr, but for the representations of
some of his fellow juron^ who informed
this deponent, that in case they, the said
jury, should return a verdict of guilty,
the said William Orr would not be pu-
nished with death. Deponent furtner
saith, that if he had at that time known
that the consequence of reluming a ver-
dict of guilty on the said William Orr
would be punishable with death, he, this
deponent in that case, would not have
consented to such a verdict, but would
have insisted and persevered in return-
ing a verdict of the said William Orr's not
being guilty.

** Sworn before me this SOth of Sept. 1797,
i& court,

YXLVEBTON*
.^'GEOBdsCsOOKS.*''

CaufU

083] 38 GEOBGS ni.

CoMMitsioir. .

Fridi^f December 99fu^ 1797.

Judge: The hon. Willwm Dmnei [tifin'
wtfds Lord Chief Justice of the Court of
King'i-beDch,]

The grind jury of the city of Dublin at the
last eommiision found the following bill of
indictment against Peter Finerty, upon which
be waa then arraigned :—

IvofiKeeUyqflTKE juiora for our
bknp iomii, > jo,^ 4^^ king upon their
eath say and present, that at a general gaol
delivery holden at Carrickfergus in and for
the county of Antrim on the seventeenth day
of April in the S7th year of the reign of our
said lord the king before the honourable Ma-
thias Finucane one of the justices of his ma-
jesty's court of Common Fleas in Ireland and
th^ honourable Denis George one of the ba-
tons of hia nuyestVa court of Exchequer in
Ireland justices and commissioners of our said
lord the king assig^ned to deliver the gaol of our
said lord the king m and for theoountv of An-
trim of the several prisoners and makftctors
therein one William Orr late of Farranshane
in the said county of Antrim yeoman was in
kwAil manner indicted for unlawfully admi-
nistering a certain oath and enga^ment upon
a book to one Hugh Wheatly which oath and
engagement imported to bind the said Hugh
Wheatly who then and there took the same to
be of an association brotherhood and society
formed for seditious purposes and also for fe-
loniously causing procunng and seducing the
said Hugh Wheatly to Wit an oath of the
said import last mentioned and also for felo-
niously administering to the said Hueh
Wheatly another oaui importing to bind tne
said Hugh Wheatlv not to mform or give evi^
dence against any brother associate or confe-
derate of a certain society then|and there form-
ed and also for feloniouslv causing procuring
and seducing the sdd Hugn Wheatly to take an
oath of the import last mentioned And af-
terwards to wit at Carrickfergus aforesaid in
the county of Antrim aforesaid before the
right honourable Barry lord Yelverton lord
chiefbaron of hismiyesty'scourt of Exchequer
in Ireland and the honourable Tankerville
Chamberlain one of his majesty's justices of
his court of Chief Place in Ireland at a sene-
ral gaol deliveiy holden at Carrickfergus
aforesaidju^tices and commisuoners &c. on
the lath day of September in the d7th year
of the reiga of our said lord the king the
said William Orr by the verdict of a certain
iury of tba said couQty of Antrim between
our said lord the king and the said William
Orr taken of and for the felooy or felonies
aforesaid In due manner was tried convicted
and attainted and for the same was duly exe-
cuioA And that one Peter Finerly late of
Mountrath street in the citv and count;? of the
d^ of Dqblin printer well knowmg the pre-
mises but bebg a irickdd iUdWpQ^. person

*nal ^Peier tmerig

[9S4

and of unquiet conversation and dispontion
and devising and intending to molest and dis-
turb the peace and public tranquillity of this
kingdom of Ireland, and to bring and draw
the trial aforesaid witli the verdict thereon
for our said lord the king agaiost the said
William Oir ^iven and the due course of law
in that behalf as aforesaid bad into batr^ and
contempt and scandal with all the liege sub-
jects of our (aid lord the king and to persuade
and cause the subjects of our said lord the
king to believe that the trial aforesaid was un-
dulv bad and that tne said William Orr did
undeservedly die in manner aforesaid and
that his excellency John Jefferies earl Cun-
den the lord lieutenant of this kingdom afVer
the conviction aforesaid ought to have ex-
tended to the sud William Orr his majest/s
gracious pardon of the felony or felonies afore-
said and that in not so extending such pardon
he the saidlord lieutenantbad acted inhumanly
wickedly and uqjustly and in a manner un-
worthy of the trust committed to him by our
said lord the king in that behalf and that the
said lord lieutenant in the government of this
kingdom had acted imjusUy cruelly and op-
pressively to his majesty's subjects therem
and to fulfil and bring to effect his most wick-
ed and detestable devices and intentions
aforesud on the S6th day of October in the
Srth year of the reign of our said lord the
king at Mountrath -street aforesaid in the
city and county of the citvofDublinafbresaid
with force and arms falsely wickedly mali-
ciously and seditiously did print and publish
and did cause and procure to be printed and
published in a certain newspaper entitled
'* The Press '' a certain false wicked malicious
and seditious libel of anil concerning the said
trial conviction attainder and execution of the
said William Orr as aforesaid and of and con-
cerning the said lord lieutenant and his go-
vernment of Vis kingdom and his majesty's
ministers employed by him inhisgovernfnenC
of this kingdom according to the tenor and
effect following to wit s " The death of Mr.
Orr " (meaning the sud execution of the said
William Orr) ^the nation has pronounced one
of the most sanguinary and, savage acts that
had disgraced the laws In peijurVi did you
not hear mv lord" (meaning the said lord heu-
tenant) " the verdict" (meaning the v(^ict
aforesaid)*' was given? Perjury accompanied
with terror, as terror has marked eveiy step of
your government" (meaning the government
of tliis kingdom aforesaid by the said lord lien-
tenant) : ** venseance and desolation were td
fkll on those ^ who would not plunge them-
selves in blood. These were not strone
enough : A^^nst the express law of the land,
not only was drink introduced to the hiry
(meaning th^ jurv aforesaid) *' but drunken-
ness itself^ toistly and crimmal drunkenness,
was employed to procure the murder of a bet-
ter man" (meaning the execution of the said
Wilfiam 'Orr) '* than any that now smnrands
you/' (meeming the said lord lieutenant).

9»5]

^ a Siditiaiu UM.

A. D. 179T.

C908

And ID anothef part thereof^ aecording tcf
tho tenor and effect foUowing, to wit : '^ Re-
pentance, which is a slow virtue, hastened
nowever to declare the innocence of the vic-
tim." (meaning the said William Orr) " The
mischief which perjury had done " (meaning
the said conviction of the said William Orr)
** truth now slept forward to repair ; neither
was she too late, had humanity formed any
part of your counsels" (meaninz the counsels
of the said lord lieutenant). *' Stung with re-
inorse on the return of reason, part of his
juiv'* (meaning the jury aforesaid) " solemnly
and soberly made oatn, that their verdict*'
(meaning the verdict aforesaid) ^ had been
^vcn under the unhappy Influence of intimi-
oationand drink; ai^d m the most serious af-
£davit that ever was made, by acknowledging
their crime^ endeavoured to atone to Goo,
and to their country, for the sin into which
they had been seduced/'

And in another part thereof according to
the tenor and effect following to wit " and
though the innocence of the accused*' (mean-
ing the said William Orr) ** had even remain-
ed doubtful, it was your duty*^ (meaning the
duWofthe said lord lieutenant) ^<my lord,
and you" (meaning the said lord lieutenant)
^ had DO exemption from that duty, to have
interposed your arm, and saved him'' (mean-
ing the said William Orr) ^ from the death"
(meaning the execution aforesaid) '' that per-
jury, drunkenness, and reward, had prepared
tor him" (meaning the said William Orr).
^ Let not the nation be told that you*' (mean-
ing the said lord lieutenant) " are a passive
instrument in the hands of others. If pas-
sive you be, then is your office a shadow in-
deed : if an active instrument as vou ought to
be, you" (meaning the said lora lieutenant)
^ did not perform the duty, which the laws
required of you" (meaning the said lieute-
nant), ^ you did not exercise the prerogative
ofmerc^; — that mercy, which the constitu-
tion bad entrusted to you" (meanine the said
lord lieutenant) ** for the safety of tne subject
bj|r guarding him from the oppression of
wicked men ; innocent it appears he" (mean-
ing the said \yiliiam Orr) '< was; his blood"
(meaning the blood of the sud William Orr)
** has been shed, and the precedent indeed ia
awful."

And in another part thereof according to
the tenor and effect following to wit " but
suppose the evidence of Wheatly had been
true, what was the offence of Mr. Orr?''
(meaning the said William Orr) *< not that he
had taken an oath of blood and extermiha-
^n, for then he had not suffered, but that
lie*' (meaning the said William Orr) " had
taken an oath of chanty, and of union : of hu-
manity and of peape ; he" (meaning the said
William Orr) ''has suffered; shall we be
^len told that your j^ernment^ (meaning
^e govecnment of this kingdom aforesaid by
the said loud lieutenant) *' wm conciliate pub-
fib opioion^ oir that the people will not conti-
nue to look for a better r"

And in another part thereof according to
the tenor and effect following thatds to say
** Is it to be wondered, that a successor of
lord Fitzwiliiam shoula sign the death-war-
rant of Mr. Orr ?" (meaning the said William
Orr) << Mr. Pitt bad learned, that a merciful
lord lieutenant was unsuited to a government
of violence : it was no compliment to the na-
tive clemency of a Camden, that he sent you'*
(meanins the said lord lieutenant) into Ire-
land, and what has been our portion under
the chSDge, but massacre and rape, military
murders, desolatioD aad terror?"

ADd in aoother part thereof according to
the teDor and effect here followins that is to
say '< feasting in your castle, in the midst of
your myrmidons and bishops, you" (meaning
the said lord lieutenant) ^ little concerneS
yourself about the expelled and miserable
cottager, whose dwelling at the moment of
your mirth was in flames ; his wife and his
claughter then under, the violation of some
commissioned ravager ; his sou agonizing oa
the bayonet, and his helpless infants crying
m vain for mercy: these are lamentations,
that stain not the nour of carpusal. Under
intoxicated counsels ;" (meaning the cdunsels
of the said lord lieutenant) <' the constitutioa
has reeled to its centre, justice herself is not
only blind drunk, but deaf, like Festus, to the
words of soberness and truth."

And in another part thereof according to
the tenor and effect following to wit^Let how-
ever the awful execution oiMr. Orr" (mean-
ing the execution aforesaid of the said Wil-
liam Orrj) " be a lesson to all unthinking ju-
ries; and let them cease to flatter themselves
that the solierest recommendation of theirs,
and of the preskling judge, can stop the course
of carnage, which sanguinary and I do not
fear to say unconttUutional laws have order^
to be loosed. Let them remember, that like
Macbeth, the servants of the crown have
waded so far in blood that they find it easier
to go on than to eo back." In contempt of
our said lord the king and his laws and against
the peace of our saicTlord the king his crown
and dignity. '

There was a second count stating merely
the first paragraph of the publication. — A
third count itatine the second — and a fourth
count stating the third paragmph.

The defebdant traversed this indictment,
and being this day brought to the bar, the fol-
lowing Juiy was sworn:

James Blacker, James* Atkinson,

Benjamin Richardaoo, William Cowan,'

John Dickinson, BhKlen Swiny,

William DiokiDson, Mark Bk>aham,

William Taylor, William Williams,

Michael Nixon, James Iting.

T« whom he was given in charge.

,CounHlJbr the Profecuti^.— Mr. Attorney
General [Arthur Wolfe, afterwards Viscount
Rilwarden, and Lord Chief Justice of the
Court of King's Bench].

9S7] 58 GEORGE UL

Mr. Prime Se^eant [James Fitzgerald].

Mr. Solicitor General [John Toier, atter-
iwards Lorci Norbury, and Lord Cliief Justice
of the Court of Common Pleas]. Mr. Worth-
ington, Mr. Townsend, Mr. Ridgeway.

JgefU,'^MT. Kemmis.

Counsel for the Traverser, — Mr. Curran [af-
terwards Master of the Rolls.]

Mr. Fletcher [afterwards one of the Justices
of the Court of Common Pleas]; Mr. M^ally,
Mr. Sheares, Mr. T. Sheares, Mr. Sampson,
Mr. Orr.

Jgent^'Mr. Dowling.

Mr. Tomuend opened the Indictment.

Mr. Attorney General. — My Lord, and Gen-
tlemen of the Jury. By the command of go-
Ternment, I prosecute the prisoner, upon an
indictment found by the grand jury of this
city, for printing and pubhsbing a false and
seditious hbel. The prisoner has pleaded not
guilty, and it is your duty, upon tne evidence
which will be given, and upon the evidence
arising from the paper charged to be a libel,
to determine two questions: — One a question
of fact, " whether the prisoner at the bar be
guilty of publishing the paper ?'^ — and the
other whether the paper itself be a seditious
libel ?*' This second question you will deter-
mine upon a careful perusal, and examination
of the paper. Previously, however, bearing.
as the late statute requires, from the learned
judge, his opinion whether the paper be a libel
or not.

Gentlemen, the crime with which the pri-
soner stands charged is a mere misdemeanor ;
yet I must take leave to say, that no jury in
modem days has been assembled upon a
case of more importance to the community,
than that which is now before you for your
consideration.

The charge against the prisoner, is that of
publishing a libel on the administration ofjus-
t ice— in order to render the judges and the
administration of justice contemptible and
odious in the eyes of the people. A libel of
the most dangerous tendency. Were the ob-
ject of the writer to be attained, the necessary
consequence must be, the total subversion of
social order, and the destruction of govern-
ment.

I mav.lay it down as a maxim, obvious to
the understanding of those who havethought»
and indeed to those who have not thought
upon the subject, that when a respect for the
adQiinistratio& of justice is Rone, every thing
vStluable is gone. Vain are laws and eovem-
roent when the people are taught to beUeve,
that those laws are executed in tyranny and
corruption.

The libel with the publication of which the
prisoner stands chared was printed on the
S6th of October last, in'a newspaper published
in the city of Dublin, under the title of ««Thc
Press.'' It would but ill become me here to
state facts not immediately pertaining to the

Trial ffPder Fhurtg

[9^

cause before you, and still less would it be-
come me (if I were capable of it), tp state any
thing in a case of such vast importance to the
community, that could affect your passions.
However something prefatory I must say
upon this paper, of which the man at the bar
having on his oath avowed himself to be the
sole proprietor and publisher, I can have no
uneasiness in stating it.

This newspaper was published fur the first
time upon the 17th of September in the pre-
sent year. An act of parliament, in order to
preserve the freedom of the press by restrain-
mg its licentiousness — in oraer (o protect the
eovernment of the country from seaitious pub-
fications — in order to protect individuals trom
slander and defamation — requires that any
man publishing a newspaper shall make an
affidavit, stating the names of the proprietors
and printers, and that a copy of every day's
publication signed by the publisher snail be
delivered at the Stamp office, in order that the
publisher may be responsible to the govern^
mentor the individual against whom he may
offend, and that there may be evidence of the
fact of publication.

On the 17th of September, the prisoner made
an affidavit pursuant to the statute, by whieh
he swore, that he was the sole proprietor,
printer, and publisher of the paper styled ** The
Press*' ; and from that day to the present he
has continued the sole. proprietor of the paper
styled " The Press." This paper has been circu-
lated through the kingdom with unexampled
industry, and manifestly appears to arrest the.
attention of a government, and of every nian,.
who has an^ regard for life, liberty, property,
or the ancient institutions under which we
are governed. I shall not eo into its general
and systematic tendency ; 1 shall maSe such
observations merely as apply to the case be-
fore you. No man, who has read \* The Press,'*
and deliberately examined the saries of papers,
can fail to see that one of its great objects is,
to destroy the credit of the administration, by
making the people believe, that the Judges,
and the jurors, and all the ministers ofjustice
are corrupt, and that a pure and equal justice
is not administered.

I do not hesitate to aver, that " The Press^
discloses such a system, and the publication now.
before you is only a part of that system, which
runs through all the papers. I shall presently
state the parts of the libel j but let me observe,
however common-place it may be, that in
performing your duty, you are called upon to
protect the liberty of the press — that liberty
of the press, which, while it is preserved,, will
preserve the freedom and constitiitipn of thia
country. The freedom of the press can only,
be destroyed by its licentiousness, and never
wiu therp a moment in. which that liberty was
in more danger, never was licentiousness
more extravagant.

Gentlemen, the indictment in this case does
state as a. mattel of fact, in order to. enable
you to understand the natMrc of the libel it-

•892

Jbf m SeiUifm tM.

A. t>. 179f.

ld*>

ielf^ that a maa of the name of William Onr
ivas indicted at the atsiies in the coimtjr of
Antrim (at SpriDjg assiiee, 1707X for adamie-
tering an unlawful oath contra^ to the sta^
tute, to a person ofthenameof Wheatly, to
be of a society formed for seditious purposes,
and binding him not to etve evidence aipunst
an? of his brethren of that society; and the
indictment farther alleges, that upon the 16th
of September in the same year, William Orr
was triedy and convicted, before the then
judges of general gaol deliverv, lord Yelvep-
ton, and Blr. Justice Chamberlain. The iir-
dictment then charges, that the prisoner at
the bar, Peter Finert^, in order to brinji into
contempt the administration of justice in this
kingdom, and to cause it to be believed that
Orr undeservedly suffered deaths and tiiat he
oucht to have received hie majesty's pardon ;
and that his excellency the wrd lienteliant
acted unjustly, inbumanlyf cruelly, and op-
pressivefy, and withheld his majesty's pardon
mm the said Orr^— did publish this, and then
the indictment sets fortn those parts of the
libel, that are particularly relied upon. Gen-
tlemen, you will, after tlie evidence shall have
been gone into, nave an opportunity of view-
ing the whole of the libeli The indictment
states only partictilar parts; but in the consi-
deration of those partictilar parts, it will be
your duty to take the whole together, and see
.whether the whole has that for its object,
which the indictment charges.*

The indictment states, that this libel was
pi4>lished^ of and cuncernini; the trial, the at-
tainder and execution of William Orr, and of
and oonceming the lord lieutenant of Ireland,
and the ministers empioj^ed by the kine in
the government of this kingdom. I forbear
So slate any of those circumstaoces Ihat at-
'tended the trial of William Orr, however de-
sirous I may be that every circumstance at-
.tending that case should be made public, be*
cause 1 do not eenceive such a statement to be
proper upeo the present occasion.

Gentlemen, the Ittwl imports to be a letter
to the lord lieutenant, published soon after
.the eiecutbnof William Oir^and it contains
thisparagraph'9—

^ The death of Mr. Orr the nation has pro-
Aoonced one of the most saneuinary and sa-
vag^eacta that had di^raccd the laws. In
|icr}ury, did you not hear, my lord, the ver-
dict was gfiven? perjury, acoom|fanied with
terror, as tenor has marked every step of your
government. Vengeance and desolation were
lo fall on those who would not plunge them-
selves in blood. These were not strong enough :
against the express law of the land, not only
waadrink introduced to the jury, but drunken-
ness itaelf, beastly and criminal drunkenness,
was employed to prooire the murder of a bet-
ter man than any that now surrounds yon.**

* The whole letter of Marcus^ as published
in No. IS of ,«The Press/' is inserledai the
^M^nniog of tbia TriW.

VOL. XXVI,

Gentlemen, is it possible to conceive any
CDod motive whatever, that could have in-
duced any man to have published that sen^
tence?^ It is not applicable to any question
to be discussed, as a matter of theory by the
public ; it is not expressed in any terms, but
such as must tend to excite the people to re-
sentment— to bring the government into con-
tempt with them. It expressly says, that the
execution of Orr was the most sanguinary and
savage act that dtseraced the laws — founded
in drunkenness ana perjury. It imports thst
dmnkenness was employed, and perjurv pro-
cured to obtain the verdict against Orr ! If
any man— if the ingenious counsel who shall
appear presently upon the part of the priso-
ner, can by the force of imagination put a
sense upon this paragraph other than such as
b calculated to excite the passions of the peo-

Ele upon topics not for their discussion, let
im suggest it, and let the prisoner have thO
benefit of it— I am not able to- find any sense
by which discussion can be advanced — or any
other than the most shameful and base charge
against the servants of the state^-that the go-
vernment does exercise acts tliat disg^race the
basest of the base, in order to' have innocent
men convicted by form of law — that the lord
lieutenant and the king's ministers, in order
to obtain a sanguinary and savage execution
of an innocent subject, have contrived to have
dnmkenness introduced into the jtny box,- un-
der the eye of the jiidge9.>

Gentlemen, another passage that has bi^en
selected out of the libel is this : " Repentance,
which is a slow virtue, hastened however to
declare the innocence of the victim. The
mischief which peijury had done, truth now
stept forward to repair; neither was she too
late had humanity formed any part of your
counsels. 8tuns with remorse, on the return
of reason, part of his jury solemnly and so-
berly made oath, that this verdict was nven
under the unhappy infloenceofintimimition
and drink ; and tn the roost serious affidavit
that ever was made, by acknowledging their
crime, endeavoured to atone to God and to
their country, for the sin into which tliey had
been seduced." Here again,- government or
the lord lieutenant is charged, with inhuma-
nity, in sufiering a sentence to be executed,
afWr it clearly appeaved, from affidavits the
most serious and solemn, that the condemned
person was innoeent. Gentlemen, mercy is
m the discretion of the crown-«-k must be
upon duo deliberation of the propriety of ex-
tending it (if it be extended) that it is to be
granteok Now, to what end or purpose, was
this paragraph imioduced ? Could the writer
ofthe libel knew upon what ground it wa^
that that royal clemency, which is ever ready
to be extended to those who are objects of it,
was refiised to be extended in this case? To
what end was this laboured paramph com-
posed } l¥as it taiemedy what had happened f
To whai-jend was it circulated through the
coomrf t«»-To exdte ooi^tempt against the ad-
^js O

0Si] S8 GEORQE HI.

ministration of jiutiee, and to maddeD the
people by falae repieseiitaiioiifl against the go«
veroment.

It is stated that soieoin affidavits wer« made
•—With regard to affidavits, if they were such
as it wascoinpeteDtto the judges to attend to,
we must sujppose they were attended to. If
others were made, the writer could not be ac-
quainted with tliem. He might have known
of some affidavits, but he could no% know
what affidavits were laid before the lord lieu-
tenant ; and not knowing them, he dared to
hazard the peace of his country, l^ making
an impressicHi, by pretending to stalC' transac-
tions of which he was ignorant.

Gentlemen, it is nnt for me to enter into an
inquiry of the truth of the facts; but I must
say, that it is contrary to the principles of
law, under which you are governed, to say,
that a verdict of twelve men upon oath u not
to be atteikled to, because one or two of them
shall, after the triid is over, be found con-
trary to their oath to state, that they are not
satisfied with it — I say this incidentally : we
have nothing to do with it upon the present
trial.

Another part of the publication is — ** And
thou§|h the innocence of the accused '* — calU
ing him innocent, who had been found .gailtv
upon the oaths of twelve men — *' And though
the innocence of the accused had even re*
maioed doubtful^ it was ]four duty, my lord,
and you had no exemption from that duty,
to have interposed your arm, and saved bim
from the death that oerjurv, drunkenness, and
reward had nreparea. for him. Let not the
naUon be toldv that you are a passive instm*
ousnt In the hands or others; tf passive you
be, then is your office a shallow indeed ; if
an active instrument, as you ought to be, you
did hot perform the du^ which the laws re-
quired of you ; you did net exercise theprero*
gative of mercy-— that meocy whioh Ibe con-
stitution had entrusted to you, for the safety
of the subject, by guarding bim from, the op*

Eression of wicked men<. innocent it appears
e was; his blood has been shed^cwid ithe
precedent indeed is a«rful/'-**IleTfi you see
this libeUer has dared to assert in the fece of
the world, that sk- man tried aceording to tte
laws of his country,: whose caeo was delibe<»
rated upon after repeated respites, that he was
an innocent man, and that the verdict was ob-
tained against him by drunkenness, terror,
and reaur^ /^Though: this libeller, prompt
as he was to say every thing false and seqi*
tious, statea the affidavits whtch he pretends
were made, he does not so much as assert,
that the affidavits charge, that rewtMrd was
given to proGure the conviction ; yet here he
states, that it was obtained by drunkenness,
terror, and. reward! — Can any man in this
Court, if sudL there be, wishing to doath se-
ditiiin with «nv thing tiiey can nsake appear
tolerable'— ia there any man who wtU dare to
saor, it is not libellous, to assert, that % vtodict
hM been obfaiiued hy rewavd?*-! do not be-

Trua of Pfttr Fhertj/

\m

Ueve» that in thiy country^ or in-Ovaat M-
tain« since the period when our oomakitutkili
waa established, any man has dared lo inai-
noate, or thought, that the vecdietafmjiiry
in a criminal case has been obtaioed by tif-
ward oiered, or given : — And I do in my ao«d
believe, that the author of this Hbel, hit 'm
the act of writing, thai he was writing that
which was frdse and eroundltiss^ If I dared
to make an appeal of Uie sort, or if it became
me, I would appeal to the people of the connty
of Antrim, who surrounded the Court— ^to the
people assembled in the streels, to thefinenda
of Orr«-to the favourers of his party, and ask
them,' even at the hazard of the present pro-
secution, whether a man among tbena be-
lieved, or could be persuaded to Mieve^ thac
the verdict waa obtained hj reward ofiered,
held oat, or given f-^li this then- be not a
hbel upon the administration of justice^ I
kno# not what a libel is; and ifil be net fetiad
so, let the soaks of justioe hki from the faanda
of the Judges ^and yield up all youposaeaste
a misled and distracted multitude.^To say,
that a nnn^ tried with all the advantages the
law allows to prisoners charged cspitaTly and
found guilty, was sacrificed^ died iaoocenl.
and suffiired by a verdict obtained by rewM
frees the executive government t — ^If » junr
can upontheir oaths find this not tebe a hbel^
it will tie time for ti>e good and the indnstrtoos
to^ abandon iheir country, and to seek pratee-
tion for their lives and properties in some hap-
pier state, where government will be pro-
tected aaainst calumny, and where tiuse ie a
respect tor the admimstt^ion of justice.

Gentlemen, though I speidc tm warmly^
I mean not to excits your passientagaiRBlllie
prisoneil; I svbak- or raa ovrsvci ; whirthe^
the prisoner be guilty, too are to judgeyupea
the evidenoe whtch shall be eiven in prow df
theptthbcatioa* ItisimpossroleteaHyBsao^
wfto has the smallest n^^ard for hh family,
his friends^ or his country, to read Uiis libe),
without feeling hims^lftsnimated beyond tht
otdidary degree of tea^x^i ef warmth in such
a moment I am nptiahstted; it is audita
alkOiild. animate a man pei^lbfsninff thtf meM
sacred duty that can be disonkrgea.

The ncKt paragraph, geatlenMn, which has
been sele^a is— and if eoe reqeiret atleotiott
niore than another, it is this—** But suppoe-
i w the evidence of Wheaily had been tnii^
what waa the offence of Mr. Orr ? Not that
he had taken an oath of blood and extermma^
tion— for then he had not suffered— but that
he had taken an oath of chariw and of uukhk
of humanity and of peace/' This is alihri of
a new species— first to tell the worhl, that Orr
was not goilty of the offence chaigrd npom
hioa— admitting it soi ofience, we tell the
worU, that the jur^ who eenmctdd him were
dt'onk^wore terNfied<p«-wete bribed. Bat
then, supposing all that was sworn to be true,
we tell the people, that he eilfiered death for
tak'ug anoath of charity and 6f nnkm--insi:>
naating to the people, that that bro0erboDd^

901]

Jffra^ftmMLHa.

A. D. 1797.

[884

tp wfaa^h Ihid tMe is to QMrlir related, is m
brotherhood of charity, instituted for the be-
nefit of mankind!

Now, geBtlemefiy you will observe, that
the crime with which this man was .charged,
was not merely adminiitering an unlawful
oath, biH administering an-oam to be of a so-
ciety formed Jar tedUiout j^rpout* The
writer of the libel, while he wrote the para-
graph which I have last read, knew he was
guilty of deceit. When a man knowingly
sends a falsehood to the world, he must do it
f6r some purpose. To what purpose this was
done, ask yourselves when you retire. This
writer tells the public, that a man suffered
death for a ertme of which he was not ac-
cused, or rather for a fact of which he was in-
noeent^The writer knew very well the crime
vritii whieh the man was diarged. He sup-
piesaes the truth, lest if he toM the truth the
peonle nvouid not be sufficiently discontented.
-^Tbe crime for which he sunered was not
the «dmini4ttoring &n oath simply and ftr m,
Imi an oath So be of a society /ormet/yor wedi-
timujmrpmB9, It must have been charged,
aadptt>ved|thathe look an oath to be true
to ia society formed for seditious pur-
poses; Hvithout such proof he could not have
bean Movkted^and here the libeller, to de-
ghule the adihinlstration of justice, tells the
people that the man suffered, not for what
WAS oharged against him, but for taking a
simple oath — an oath of charitjr and love.
AH that passed at that time and since too ob-
viously proclaim the object of the libeller in
that publication.

.Another fwramph is this:— ^' Feastine in
your castle, in tne midst of your myrmidons
and ^bishops, yoti have liule concerned your-
8^ about the expeUed and miserable cottager,
whose dwelling, at the moment of your mirth,
wfain flames; his wife and his daughter then
mider Ihe^vioktion of some commissiooed ra-
vager : his son agonizing on the bayonet, and
his helpless iilfa»tl trying in' vain for mercy.
Tfiase are laoientations that stain not the
hour of carousal. - Under intoxicated counsels
the cOBstilutidn has reeled to its osnter ; jus-
tice herself is not only blind drunk, butoeaf^
like Festus, to the words of soberness and
truth."

(090 agi^o,| aientkmen, attending to the
latter part, as the context of the whole, is a
direct attack upon the administmlion of jus-
tice. She is pamted as blind drunk ; and the
people .are taught to believe, that no attention
IS ^nid to therai or to the administratiofi of
juatice by iha lord lieutenant, or those whom
he conwlts respeetiiig it

.Xhe indtotment ant slates this paragraph
from the Itbel :—

•^ Let, hdiifievjsr, the awful exeoutioD of Mr.
Orr be- a lesaon tio all udthinkinc juries ; and
let iheas «eaie to flatter themselves, that the
floberest recommendation of theirs and of .the
pMiidiM judge ean sWp the course of icitt-
aagB^ miiih.eaog«iiiary, and 1 do not fi

to say, unconstitutional laws have ordered to
be loosed. Let them remember that, like
Macbeth, the servants of Xhe crown have
waded so far in blood, that they find it eas^ier
to go on, than to go back.''

Gentlemen, here again is a direct charge
with regard to the trial of Orr. The writer
desires all thinking juries to be careful how
they depend upon the rtcommendation of the
preuding judge, or the recommendation of ju-
ries. Leaving the people to believe, that in
this case, the judge and jury had recom-
mended this unfortunate man. With re-
gard to the matter of fact, I abstain from say-
mg any thine, and it would ill become me at
this time and in this place, to state any thing
from my own knowledge. The people are •
told by this paragraph, that the lord lieiiie-
nant pays no attention to the lecommendalion
of the judge— in oUier words, saying to the
juries who shall try criminals, ^' if you think
I them objects of mercy, and think them guiUj^»
acquit them, lest the lord lieutenant or thie -
king should not extend mercy to them, i|s they
ought''— -That is the wicked doctrine held out
among many others* The insinuation is, that
the lord lieMtenant will pay no attention to
the recommenda^n of tne presiding judge,
or of the juiy^ because he has a desire to ete
cute the lat^ id blood, and without mercy !

To lay it down, as a universal rule, that
the Inrd lieutenant should pardon on every
recommendation of a judge is perhaps too ex-
tensive; the oirdumstancesofevery case must
be considered. The ablest judge might re-
commehd a man to mercy, and it might be
a(\erwards found, that he was not an object
deserving of that mercy. Again, with respect
to the recommendations of juries-^Juries do
recommend to mercy oflen ; sometimes their
recommendation is successful; oftentieoes
not. The extension of mercy is given by the
constitution solely to the crown, or the k>rd
lieutenant as the representative of the crown.
To him upon the circumstances of the case it
belongs to extend or withhold it. If one
might judge from known public fads, we
might suppose that much deliberation was
had Ob m. Orr's case, for he was respited
several times to give time for inquiry and
consideration.

With regard to the chatge of not attending
to the recommendation of the judge, cne
might be bold to say, and I shall believe it,
till the contrary be shown, that the crown
never has refused to extend mercy to any man
whom the judge presiding recommended to
mercy. Can we believe that the judge in
Orr*fl case recommended him for mercy ?

Gentlemen, upon the whole of this .case,
you will consider whether this paper could be
printed and published with any other view
thftn thAt vhk:h is imputed to it— The fact
of the publication will be established by evi«
dence^ which I shall now sUte. I have al-
ready said, that the law requires the publisher
of a newspaper, fievious to publication, to set

9S3} 38 GEORGE III.

out on oftthy the names of the printers and
proprietors ; and also requires that a copy of
every publication shall be deposited in the
Stamp-office, signed with the name of him
who has avowed himself the proprietor. We
shall produce the affidavit made by the prisoner
on the 17th of September last : — you would
expect we should produce the paper deposited.
The papers down to the day of^ the publica-
tion for which the prisoner was arrested, are .
deposited ; all subsequent papers to the day
on which the prisoner was arrested in Novem-
ber last but the copy for the «6th of October,
and that alone, is not to be found in the Starop-
ofBce. How it is gone — by whose means, or
by what contrivance, or machination is not
for me now to conjecture ; but happily that
defect will be supplied : we shall prove a pa-
per bought upon that day at the place where
the prisoner published his paper. So that
there can be no doubt whatever of the fact of
publication; and with regard to the libel, it
IS impossible that a man of common under-
standing—I know whom I address, that there
is not a man amone you without an under*
standing^ capable of deciding any case — but
I say it IS impossible for any man, resaidful
of the laws, the constitution, the sacied righU
we have to maintain, to hesitate a moment
in finding this publication a libel. Thus you
will find a verdict, tending, I trust, to establish
the liberty of the press, and restore with full
force the administration of justice in this
kingdom. I cannot belter inforcesoroe ob-
servations that I have made, than by reading
to you the words of a judge of the most distin-
^tshed talents and greatest experience, acting
jn another kingdom, and in a case totally un-
connected with party, and when passion was
not excited. In the case of the King v. Wat-
son and others, judge BuHersaid :— «« Nothing
can be of greater importance to the welfare of
the public than to put a stop to the animad-
versions and censures which are so frequently
made on courts of justice an this country.
Th^ can be of no service, and may be at-
tended with the most mischievous conse-
(]uences. Cases may happen in which the
judge and the jurv may be mistaken i when
they are, the law has afforded a remedy ; and
the party injured^ is entitled to pursue
evjery method which the law allows to correct
the mistake. But when a person has recourse
either by a writing like the present, ly pubO^
eaiioni in prints or by any other means, to ca-
lumniate the proceedings of a court of justice,
the obvious tendency of it is to weaken the ad-
minutratUm of juUiee^ and in anuequenee vo

SAP THE VERY FOU^DATIOV OF THK GOUSTITO-
TION ITSELF." ♦

George Hatton^ esq, swom^

You are a commissitNier of stamp dntieal
—Yes.

Is that your name and hand-writingi--
{show^ig faim an alfidavh]. It is.

• ST. R. ao5.

Tfiol iffFdm Fbimig
That

[086
wastwom before you f— It'

By the prisoner?— I cannot exactly say;
the room in which 1 took the affidavit was
very dark.

Oeorge Hatton^ esq. cross-examined*

Can you say positively it was sworn by the
prisoner? — Not positively. I asked the man
was it his name and hand -writing f He said it
was.

Court, — W^ it sworn before you by a man,
saying his name was Peter Fincrty f — It was.

{The affidavit was then read as folkywt ;—
'' Tbe affidavit of Peter FIner'ty, sworn
the 19tb of September, 1797, before
George Hattoo, e«(|. one of the commia*
sioners for managing the stamp duties—
This deponent saith, that he is the only
true, ana sole printer, publisher, and pro*

Srietor of a newspaper to be published at
lo. 4, Church-lane, in the aty of Dub*
lin, intituled ' The Press,'— and says that
DO other person^ save this deponent, is a
proprietor of, or baa any share, or profit
msakl newspaper. And saitb this depo*
nent's true place of abode is at No. 9S^
Mountrath-street* in tlie city of Dublia
aforesaid — saitb be makes this affidavit
in compliance with an act of parliament,
intituled 'An Actfor Securing tbeLiberty of
' the Press.'"]

Mr. Jfokn Kingsbury sworn.

Have you any paper about you ? — I have.

Produce itf [The witness produced a
newspaper!.

Where did you net tt^—^ believe I bought—

Mr. Ctwrea.— ^top there, nr, that is not
evidence.

Witnea — .1 bought a paper with a letter
signed ** Maicusy** which paper I gave to my
^her.

Where did you buy It ?— I bought this paper
at No. 4, Charcb-lane. I gave it to my fiitberi
and he returned it to me.

That is the paper, in your hand, which
your fiither gave back to you ? — It is.

Mr. John Kingsbury cross-examined*

From whom did you buy thb paperf— I do
not know.

Was it from a common news-hawkerr— I
am positive it was not

Why?— Because I went to the offioe, and
booKfat a paper bwnng this letter from a man
in the office; I can form no belief as to the
man, whether he was a servant or a clerk.

For ^hat purpose did you buy the pi^ier P— *
I bought it to read it myself.

How long after you bought it, did yon oive
your father a pMwrP — I thmkl gave it to nim
that evening. I bought it as I was going to

OCMit

HowmanydidTou lend it to before jon
gvve it to jour fattier P«—P«Nitively to no ana.

987]

fwa Seditioiu

A. D. 1797.

[938

Whtrt wat it from the time you read it,
iMitil yoii kmt it?— In my pocket.

Where is your fhther? — He is in court.

Comnteifir the Protecution, — You went to
iniy a paper from curiusiiy? — Merely for my
own reading: I have several limes bought
liapers there since for my own reading.

Cmirt. — None before ?— I will not say posi-
tively, my lord.

Who was present?— I will not say there
was any person, but the man in the office,
who folded up the paper, and gave it into my
Jiand.

He was not a servant ? — ^T cannot say : I
will not say, whether he was a servant, or a
jderk

Did you ever make any inquiry at the
Stamp-office?--! did, I went to the office to
^lesire the attendance of Mr. UBstrange and
Mr. Hatton ; Mr. L'Estrange, told me—

[The traverser's counsel objected to this.]

Did you search for the paper there ? — No t
Mr. L'Estrange told me he bad the paper at
home.

Did you ask htm for it again P— On Satur*
day, the 9th of December, f saw him at Mr.
Kemmis*s

Does he attend here as a witness ? — I can-
not say ; I saw Dr. Harvey, who told me Mr*
L'£8trange was out of his senses.

Tkomai Kingshury, esq. sworn.

D9 you recollect getting a newspaper from
jTOur son f — I do.

What did you do with it?^After reading
it, I put it into my desk, and locked it up.

Do you recollect about what time you eot
thai paper?— I cannot recollect particularly ;
but I believe shortly after the publicatkm;
whether the day immediately afler, I cannot
say ; it was shoHly afler.

You put it into a desk of your own ?— I
did.

Under a lock and key ?— I did.

Who took it out of that desk ?— I did. .

You kept that key yourself ?— I did.

That was a place in which you locked up
other things you kept carefully f— 'Yes, Hocked
up money there.

Who was the person vou gave that paper
to afler taking it out of the deakP— Tomy
son, the last witness.

It was a paper importing to be a paper
called « The Pre8S?"-It was.

Do you recollect a letter in it signed Mar-
cus ?— I do; that was the reason I kept it.

Dkl you give it to your son, as the same
person who had delivered it you?— I did.

Mr. John Kingtbury examined again.

It the paper you produced the identical pa-
per returned to you by your fiuher ?-— It is the
very paper: I got it from my father on the
9th of December, and have hid it in my pos-
aeseioB ever nnce.

I%omai Kingikuyf esq. cross-examined.

You locked up the paper in your desk ?— I
did. •

In consequence of a remarkable letter N-.
Yes.

Did you give the paper to any other person
to read that remarkable letter ?— I do not re-
collect I did.

There are some persons in your house, that
you mij^ht have given it to read ?— No; the
persons in my house are noostly daughters.

Can you say positively you did not lend it f
— I take upon me to say, it was not out of my
sight ; if I gave it to any person, it was in the
room where my family were sitting, and it
was not out of my sight till I lockH it up.

Mr. M' NaUy. ^My lord, I object to this
paper being read. There is an act of parlia*
men tin this kingdom for protecting the liberty
of the press, and by that act every printer
is obliged to deposit with the officer of
stamps a copy of each publication.

Mr. Justice Doamet. — ^You do not mean to
say, Mr. M'Nally, that no bther species of
evidence of publication is admissible, but that
mentioned in the act F

Mr. Af'Na//y.«-No, my lord? butthesta*
tule creates a superior species of evidence.
The statute shews the intention of the legis-
lature : it is for securing the Kberty of the-
press, and that the press may not be prose-
cuted opoo vasue and improper grounds. •

Mr. Justice Dovaet.— Do you mean to con-
tend that there is no evidence lo go to &'
jury?

Mr. M'^e//y.— My lord, I mean to say
that the best evidence which the nature of
the case admits, and which the law requires,
is not given.

[The Court directed the paper to be read.]

Mr. APNally desired to have the record^ to
compare it with the paper, while the officer
was reading it.

Mr. Justice Downet, — ^The officer may have'
the record in his hand and compare it, while
another person reads the paper: — But the
officer cannot part with the custoc'y of the
record, you or your agent may look over the.
record while the officer reads it.

Mr. M'Na//y.— It is the constant practice
in Eneland, upon trials for libels« to let the
defendants counsel inspect the record. I
never knew it refused.

[It was at length agreed, that the traverser*^
agent mieht set beside the officer, and see
the record compared.

Tlie letter signed ** Marcus" was then
read firom the paper by the clerk of the
crown, while his depufy held the record^
and compared it.]

Waller Bourne, esq. examined. .

MTbat office do you bold?— DcfRity cbrk
of the crown for "the eounty of Antrim.

699] 38 GjBORGfi III.

Have you the custody of tlie criminal re-
cords of that county ?— I ba^c.

WM is Ibat in yeur k^M f-^Tt^t record
of the conviction of William Orr.

Is U jthe origpnal Mcord ?-*U is.

[^A part of this record was read, for fortn*s
sake, the traverser's counsel not desir-
ing to have the whole read.]

liere the case was rested {or the crown.

TrMqfPeUr Fmmty

[940

Mr. J^44«r^TMy lord, Ian. couDS(sl for
the traver8<er„ and I would just Male apreli-
rainary objection Ahat atriloss my undersland-
jflgy not with a jview or-preventing ihe counsel
£Mr the crown fiwin supplying the defect, if
t(iey can.«— The evidence do prove the h/U of
publioatioii consists «f this: A witness was
fipoducedoa tbe pait «f the cn>wQ» who swore,
thai .an individual, oklling fiimself by the
naoie of the iraMraer, <lid awear an BflUaivit
wbifih was lodged in the office, I did not
upd^rstand|irpm:thc evidence, that be proved
either one or otber of these two things ;
iiafDaly»4baA be ivai convineed in his consci'
epce, that the traverser is the individual
Pfler FincrtjT, mho awona the affidawt, or
what, I admit, might be evidence to go in
siibstiMition; Ibat the signatiire to the affi-
davit purported to be the band-writing of
the Amverser, ^r that lie belieiwd it to be the
hand^writing of ^le Uavemer.

Under these eicoMinslances^'niiy lold, 1 con-
tend, .tb»t -th^ kgMnture having peialed out
a narticMiar kind of vOvidenoe, in a leaae of all
onibers Jliablf to eflrory bringing boofie tJtue (act
tp the party accused ; that kmdof evidence has
not been psoduced bere^ but to lay aground
fbr Ae fubfititution of iafcdor, evidence, it
sjti-ikeao^bttiiiiUe .uodeiBtandiMg»;tliat they
ought to have eone a step farther;. 4)008000
otherwise it would be miyitfest,.tbat in times
like the present, it ie not impossible, that toy
individual in the cpnununity odlinfi hiqmlf
Peter Finer^ mi^t oner bim3eif at the
Stamp-office — offer an affidavit and sign his
Dame, wh^n he was not Peter Fioexlv at all.
.> If the commissioner had gone farther, and
said he believed the band-writing to be that
of the traverser, X should be inclined to be-
lieve, it would be evidence for the jury. But
the evidence offisred is the lowest that imngi*
nation can conceive; for it amounts to no
xnore than that a man calling himself Peter
Finerty, offered himself at the Stamp-office,
and signed a name purporting to be the name
vof Peter Finerty ; out where is the evidence
briqgittg; it to the Uairerser? Wbioh ai^iH-
]iriatas U.to Jbtim f— And avrely, my .loi)d» in a
case, of this kind, which has bes^ stated aa a
CMO -thesfBOst^Bagiltious, a muUo fortiori is it
necesiary, iSM th# pmf should.be ^nmght
hfMM, fm if the ^vffrser be /cpj^viqvM 4t
SDould be upon satisfaqtory evidenp&r^I
merely, s^te this my lord, and shall ^ down
to wait the opinion «r the Conft.
. : Mr> fiiinwi|.-4^ tMBt^ my Jord, S^u 49 not
think itAUMfimy imM^ifi^WfM^g^

what l^as been said by Mr. FleUber. I take
it, my lord, that in all cases there must be
3ome evidence of the identity of the prisoner,
-rr^^n affida^t has been read, purporting to
be n^ide by some person oslling himself
Peter Finerty. What evidence is there that
it was niade by the traverser ? The evidence
offered u to show that he is proprietor of
the Printing-office, No. 4, Church-lane. His
declaration of that would be evidence against
him, becausfs it would be an admission against
himself. -Now, suppose there were no affida*
vlt ; but a witness said a man came to me, said
his name was Peter Finerty, that be lived at
No, 4, Church- lane, and that he was the prin-
ter of ** The Press ?'' All that mieht be true :
a person might have told that-to Uie witoeas ;
but whitX that person ^id may not be true.
There os^ust be some evidence to .satisfy the
jury, that the traverser was the persop who
made that declaration. It is evident, that
an^.itien in: hnnsan eoeiety alight bufe «one
to the office. He is asked who he is—'' I am
Peter Finerty ;*•— is that evidence, unless it
appears it t^as the traverser ?>-SUpptM' the
common case of a proraissoiy note; a man is
sued upon it. The witness is asked, do you
know the defendant?— no. Hi^ hand-writing?
— no; but somebody said it was signed by
Finerty, and he is the defend^t. Is Tt not as
necessary to prove the identity in a criminal,
as in a civil <;ase ? Would you in a civil bill
give a depree upon evidence,* that somebody
said the defendant signed the note, without
Showing, that it was Ibe defiindant? I do
not find any evidence of that kind here, and
I Iboii^t it idle to .enter into a fencing
uponia aubiect of this kind, or to interpose
with she .order which the oonnsel for the
crown might be >desiious of pursuing. But, I
Uuat your bidship will thudi it one of the
mltprintiplBs.of W, that me- man can be
affected, either civilly asupon^ coatraot. Or
c^imtanliyias .upon a delinquenay, unless
there be some evidence that he is the per-
son afptinst whom the contractu alleged, or
the critulnality advaaeed. The evidence here
is, nakedly, that soowbody or other, whom
tlietvittiessdoes not know, did swrar that
affidavit. Idonotknowttutttfaelawofthis
country does appropriate a name to the single
use of any innividual. I have not heard of
any monopoly of that kind. Siifipase all
that the commissioner said to have been true ;
auppeee the man wtw went, really bon the
name of Peter Finerty; may there not be two,
or ten pccsoadof the^ame name? la a man
then to be crknioalW reapeseible upon a ver*
^^hyM jury,.by Which fkey ettabiafa, that
someinaa «r the naaM4lkl a .partionU»aer,
no matter who he is ?— Because 1^/0^^ ^^^i*^'
ship let ^s go to the jury, as suflicient evr«>
dencf^ ^y f^ai ^tinki if all tbe ether aaita
!be euablisbed. tJbat there is on doubjt of the
•ident^^ ^^^ they will give a verdieli^baJigi^g
some miM) of the name of PeierFioerty-—
But Is there any evidence wl#letwi[| ibat the

»«3

Jhra SfMiom IXbk.

Peter Tlnerty wad tbe mtti now upon trial at
the barf

Mr. Justice Dovn^t.-^Do you propose to
do any thing more, Mr. Attorney GeneraT ?

Mr. Attorney General. — My lord, it strikes
Bie there is evidence to eo to the jury; —
However we will give farther evidence. ,

George. Hatton, esq. again examined*

Do you know the prisoner? — I believe
Iiim to be the man who swore the affidavit

Mr. Cnrran. — Sir, you cannot^ ^ve that
evidence.

Counsel for the Prosecution, — How was he
dressed ?— He had a great coat, and appeared
as if he came from pnnting.

Mr. Curran, — I am sorry to see an attempt
of this kind to supply evidence which is de-
fective.

Mi0or Sirr sworn.

Do you know Peter Finerty ?— I do.

Point him outT — I'here he is [pointing to
the traverser].

Do you recollect having arrested that pri^-
sonerP^I do.

Upon what day ?— I do not recollect the
exact day.

tn what month ?— It was daring the silting
of the last commission.

Where did you arrest the prisoner ?» At an
office, called the Press-office^ in Church-lane^

What number ?— Number 4, Church-lane.

Had you any conversation with the prisoner
at that time ?— I had.

State what it was ?— I asked him if hi9
name was Peter Finerty.

Mr. Curran^^^l trust the counsel will have
the candour lb mention what is the evidence
which the^r intend to give ; that if there be
any objection to it, we may make it

Mr. T0M«nM«-*I am gMfl^ fto givci evidence
of declarations made by the prisoner;, and. to
render them admissible, I' will ask a preUmi:
nary question. Was the prisoner induced by
hopes or fears to make any declaration to you f

{Tb» counael for the traverser, olgacted to
this questiQl)4

Mr. Tcwnfe»(?/-^If there be no objection Xq
the witnl^ss hearing me, I will state the evi-
dence we mean to give. I am instructed,
that major Sirr took the prisoner in Church-
lane, and that he did there confess he was
the printer of the paper.

Mr.* M'Nalh/, — I beg leave to state an au-
thority.—In 5 Mod. 165. Lord Hot I heM, upon
trial of an information for a Bbel, ^ that if a
confession shall be taken as e^dence to con-
vict the party, it is but justice and reason, and
to allowed in the civil law, that his whole
confession shall be evidence, as well for as
asaindthim, and then there will be no proof
or a malicious and seditious publication.'*

^ Justice Dd»7aes:^To be sure, th^ wbpljs
dedatatbn •must go to the jury.

Mention wliat die oonyeTsation wka, which
II

A. D. IMT: I9ii

you hti with the prisoner ?— t asked him
whether bis name was Peter Finertv. and whc^
ther he was the pubHsher of the ** the Press.!'
Hie told me that he was^.

Is that the man at the bar ?— He is.

Did you ask him one or two questions f*- 1
asked him first, was his name Peter Finerty.

Did he answer P — He did ; he said bis nam^
was Peter Finerty.

Then you asked him a farther question?— I
did; I asked him was he the publisher of
**The Press ;" he said he was.

Miyor Sirr cros^examined^

Who was present at that conversation ?—
Three or four people, I think.

Can you name them? — I cannot; I would
know one of them, if I saw him.

Did you ask him, if he was the person who
signed the affidavit ?— I knew nothing of the
affidavit.

Did ^ou ask him, was he the author of the
paper signed Macct^ ? — I did not.

YOU do not know any of the persons whp
were there ? — No.

Had you a warrant ? — I had.

Did you go singly ? — No, I bad a man with
me.

What is his name?— Mitchell.

Where does he live ? — ^In Ship-street

Of what business is he ? — I do not know.

You know mm, without knowing what he
is ? — He is an evidence for the crown.

Was this before or after the publication
signed Marcus?^-! do not know; I received
a warrant, and executed it.

Can you fix the time, whether it was be-
fore or afler ?~I cannot be positive.

What did you do with Finertv?— I brought
him to the CasUe^yard, and had him escorted
to Newgate.

You are a zealous advocate for the freedom
of the press ; have you taken any steps to re-
strain Its licentiousness ? Are you the persoa
who chased a carrier of ^* The Press'' with •
drawn sword ?

Mr. Justice DiKPnei.— The witness; is not
bound to an^w^r that question, if he do not
choose it.

tTiVnffj.— r never did*

The Cpurl tells you, that you may answer
the question, if you choose? — ^I say, I did
hot.

Did you, see any person stop a carrier, of
«« The Press '^i—Nb.

Were you present when Fmerty was taken
out of N^wjgate, and brought tQ aldermai)
Alftxi^ndef's m the night time?— No.

Do yoM know, wheuer " The Press '' is a pi^
per in the pay of government, oc the treasury I
— I should imagine not.

Are there not other papers in the pay of
government?
' Mr. Justice Downes, — I do not see that, thif
eun)ii^ati(})ViB material JU> the present das^.

Mr. a»np<(m.t— My lord, it is my dut^ tq
submit t6'the Court :--fiut if 1 think the

948] S8 GEORGE III.

4

question may b« material, I hopa I ihaU be
heacd. I do uoi wish to shut out any light
which may assist the discretion of the jury
upon the decision of this most important
question.

Mr. Curran. — Mj lord, we conceive the
evidence to be admissible in this way. This
is a prosecution avowedly carried on by the
state, and the jury being entire judges alto-
|;ether upon the entire fact, it may not he
imroaierial for them to know, whether the
government which prosecutes this paper,does
not itself employ papers on its own behalf.

Mr. Sampmm.-^l tnank Mr. Curran. My
lord, I coDceifC, there is no right to praise
wisely, or to censure without justice.

Mr. Townnnd. — If this were a Court-mar-
tial, which could enforce retribution, or ac-
knowledgment of improper conduct, there
might be some foundation for the question
which has been put.

Mr. Justice Dawna^ — ^^'hat is your ques-
tion, Mr. Sampson }

Mr. Samoton. — My lord, my questions are
to many, tnat 1 cannot tell them, but in the
order in which I shall put thcra to the wit-
ness.
' Mr. Justice Downes. — Put )rour question.

Mr. Sampion, — I ask the witness, whether
there are not papers in the pay of govern-
ment?

Mr. TWnif R(/.— I object to that question.

Mr. CttrroB.— The conduct of the govern-
ment is the suluect of the examination in this
paper.

Mr. Justice Downa. — This Court does not
sit to inquire into the conduct of government

Mr. Curran, — ^The statement of the counsel
has gone into a history of the government for
years back, and I do not say it was improper.
But I beg leave to shelter the question now
put under the authority of that proceeding.

Mr. Attorney General, — My lord, I do ob-
ject to this question. I do avow, that on
the part of the government I prosecute this
man at the bar, for an atrocious libel ; and
bv wav of defending this man, who has
pleaded, not guilty, tney say, that the mi-
nisters have done something wron£. The
avowal of the counsel is this, that they will
examine to show, that government pays a
paper, and publishes Whets against other peo-
ple, and upon that eround, they hope in a
country, where a little yet remains, to intlu-
ence the jury. I'hey want to show that crimes
are committed by government. Undoubtedly,
aome of the members of the jgovernment may
commit crimes, and may publish libels. Let
them be punished for it, if the fkct be so.
But is the euilt of the man at the bar to k>e
done away by the crimes of others P My lord,
I object to the question, on account of the
law, on account of practice, and because it
would be inquiring: into the conduct of others
not upon their triS.

Mr. 5BUR/>soii.~My lord, I have not yet
had an opportunity of laying my sentiments

Trkl ^PH€r Kmrig

[M4

befbf* the Court My respect for the attoniey
reneral prevented me from intemiptingr him.
It is a rule of law, my lord, observed oy all
cotmsel, and God forbid, there should be one
rule for the counsel for the prisoner, and an-
other rule for the counsel for the prosecution,
— I say, it is a rule to state, what they in-
tend to prove. It was stated by the attorney
general, that this paper was part of a system^
and he has introduced invocations to God,
and called upon the pau»sions of the jury.
My lord, we do not live in a country— and 1
ought to respect the law and the judges, when
1 say so— where non-resistance is the doctrine
of the law — in a country where it is trea-
son-
Mr. Justice Downes, — Speak to the point
Mr. Sampson, — My lord, the point is this,
that the attorney-general has made it part of
his case, that *' The Press," was a part of a
vile system. I want to show it is no such
thing, and by showing, that there are papers
free to say what they choose on one side, it
is vain to say, the press is free, if it be put
down on the other. It is nothing but a
fair system, to oppose argument by argu-
ment— assertion by assertion, and invecUve
by invective, with this only difficulty, that it
has no men in arms to assist it, and can only
be defended by paper shot

Mr. Justice Downes^ -This is not arguing a
point of law.

Mr. Sampson.^l wish to ask the witness^
whether he believes there is any paper in the
pay of the treasury.

Mr. Justice Doanes, — ^Thal is a auastion
not at all relevant to the case before tlie jury,
and should not be asked.

Did you ever hear of the Northern Star
beins put down by the soldieiy?—- 1 have
heara it

[This exammatien was objected to.]

Mr. FUieker,^My lord, with great respect,
we, who are to defend the traverser, suppose
that malice and sedition are cliarged to be the
objects of the libel. The jury are judges of
the ol(iect and the motives of the publication
— we are appriied, that it is stated to be a
false and malicious libel against the govern-
ment, and that it is partora system ibrmed
to bring the administration into contempt, and
to dissolve the government We suppose, my
lord, that the guilty conduct of that paper,
such as it is, and the intentionsof it,are oefore
the jury, now competent to determine what is
legal evidence against him and what is not*
The time i^ gone oy, my lord, when any per-
son sitting where your lordship does, was to
pronounce whether the matter was libellous,
or not Now, my lord, to show this paper to
be a libel, it must be shown, that it is mali-
cious and false, and then sedition, followiu in
common sense and in contemplation of law.
Now, the question is, whether this man,
being indicted as the printer and publisher of
a paper, may be calumniated by persons^ sot

©49]

Jor A Stditioui IMA

A. D. 1797.

[946

warranted by the highest executive authority,
but by subordinate (raicers ? Suppose that to
be the fact; is not the evidence now offered,
apposite to the quo animo ^ — Is it, or is it not ?
In any case whatsoever— sup|Mise it was a case
of murder; would not every thing elucidating
the intention of the man, supposed to be
guilty of homicide, be evidence ? Would not
every act of the party ^ain tending to provolce,
be evidence ? Does not malice always arise
wheoerer it appears, from a mass of evidence
of that kind? If two persons meet— one is
roughly treated — ^grossly injured — words arise
''—one strikes — another returns — is not all
that evidence to go to the jury ?— So in a case
of libel; there is a distinction between private
slander and public censure. This is no indict-
ment for attacking a private bosom-friend, and
dragging into public view, his conduct in pri-
vate life ; his family connexions, with which
the public have nothing to do : therefore this
is not a prosecution for private slander, but
the kind of libel, now the subject of inquiry,
is stated to be, for calumniating the state.
Is not the liberty of the press ; the wholesome
liberty of the press, in every government to
be supported ? And is not therefore the quo
auBHQ of the party the veiy pith and marrow
of the prosecution? How can the jury say,
whether this libel be false and malicious, and
draw from that the inference of seditious, ex-
cept they follow the attorney-general, and
believe, that the man, who wrote this libel,
did it with malice prepensed, knowing the
patter to be false ? But if, on the contrary,
it comes out, that there are other papers,
using provoking language and expressions of
this kind, does it not go Jo the 9110 animo with
which the fact of publication was done?

Mr. Justice Dovnei. — It all comes to this,
that various libels are published in other papers.

Mr. Fletcher. — No, my lord. The question
is, whether papen are published ? We do
not say lUelt.

Mr. Justice Downei.-^l conceive that to be
utterly immaterial to this case.

Mr. Fletcher. — Suppose, my lord, this was
an information, at the suit of an individual,

S rounded upon a letter containing much slan-
erous matter — would it not be evidence to
ahow another letter written to the accused an-
tecedent to the letter sent by him ? — We, who
are concerned for the traverser, in our humble
Judgments conceive, that every thing tending
to show the intention, even though that in-
tention should be erroneous^ is evidence. K
majiinay in error, but honhfide^ publish mat-
ter against government ; but the jury are to
determine the auo animo with which it was
iniblished. I call your lordship*s attention to
the letter written by Junius to his majesty :-^
"The jurjr, before the act of parliament upon
the sttbiect of libels, brought in a verdict
against the printer, Guiliy of publishing*
only s* there was a contest with respect to
* . ■ ■ ■ ■

• 5pe Woodfall's case- ««<«, vol. SO, n. 395.

VOL. XXVI.

the verdict, and that case actually produced
the act of parliament. The jury would not
find any guilty intention. . In this case, -how
can your lordship say, what effect it may have
upon the jury, as to the question of intention ?
Or suppose this to he the fact — the gentlemen
concerned for the crown may waive any thing
in their own favour : suppose the jury were,
(irom the resistance of those gentlemen, to be
of opinion, that government did employ pa-
pers to do to the country, what it is said, tnis
paper has done to the state, can your lord-
ship tell, whether that may not be matter
for the exercise of the judgment of the jury
upon the quo animo f Will it not show the
kind of view with which prosecutions of this
kind are brought forward? — ^The provocation,
if any, arising, not from this paper, bu^froni
others. Willnot that go to the point, which
under the act of parliament the jury are to
tryf We think, that every thing which can
be brought, in the judgment of the jury, to
bear upon the mind of the party accused in
doing the fact charged against him, is appli-
cable to the present case.

Mr. Justice Downes, — Oo you examine any
farther?

Mr. Sampton, -— Your lordship decides
against the question ?
Mr. Justice Doanes. — I have.
Mr. Sampson. — My lord, I submit :— I will
ask another question.

Did you at any time seize a parcel of thesepa-
pers intituled ** The Press ?"— I will not answer
that question, unless I am told that I must.
Mr. Prime Serjeant, — The answer to that
question may criminate himself.

Mr. Justice Downes.— The witness must be
the judge, whether it tends to criminate him-
self:

Mr. Sampson. — Major Sirr, you are to judge*
whether the answer will tend to criminate
yourself; and the question is, did you ever
seize any papers intituled " The Press ?" — I
will not answer.

Do you hold any office under government ?
^No.

What office do you hold ? — Deputy town
major.

Are you a magistrate? — I*Jo ^farther than
that.

Mr. Curran, — I trust your lordship will be
of opinion that the counsel for the crown have
failed to supply the evidence, and that it is not
necessary for the traverser to go into any
ca^ ; and the counsel for the crown having
been admitted by the indulgence of the
Court, waitii^g a length of time, to go into
a supplemental case, ttiey will not be allowed
a repetition of that kind. •

My lord, I submit, that this paper has not
been proved in such a manner as to uiake it
evidence to go to a jury. The evidence which the
counsel have offered of it, consists ahortly of
this. I shall state merely that which is material
—Mr. Hatton swore that he took the affidavit
produced—that somebody signed it, that it was
' '3 P

947]

38 GEORGE IIL

Trial cfPeUr FintHjf

[94B

in a dark room, and he did not undertake to '
identi^ the person of an;^ man swearing it.
Therefore! his evidence simply rests there,
namely, that there was an affidavit sworn be-
fore him by somebody, calling himself Peter
Finerty, and the question is, whether the want
of proof of the identity of the person has been
supplied or not? — ^That was the defect in the
evidence ; I say first they have not Supplied
it ; because they cannot by law be admitted to
go into the kind of evidence which they have
given to supply the defect. It was stated b^
tlie counsel for the crown, that an affidavit
was sworn by Finerty, and subscribed by
Finerty, and an affidavit vras produced as
such ; therefore there did appear that species
of evidencce from which they ought not to be
allowed to travel. It is a higher species of
written evidence, put upon the recoros of the
country, authenticated by the oath of the man
swearine it, and the office of the man taking
it. In the most common case, if a deed be
produced, it must be proved by the subscribing
witness to it; and the acknowledgment of the
party that it was his, cannot be arlmitted ;^-
there must be evidence of a search for the
ivitness, and bis hand-writing roust be proved,
if he be not produced himselY'.

Mr. Justice Domnet.^-'li 9l deed be the deed
of the partv against whom it is produced, and
is admitted by himself, it is evidence, and may
he read against him.

Mr. CttfTfln.— My lord, I will not controvert
that— I go upon that very principle. If there
be evidence that the traverser admitted the
signature to the affidavit to be his, it wiflbe
evidence against him. Bert where there is
avowedly written evidence, that niust be the
foumlation of the fact to be estabhahed by it,
and it cannot be established by other evidence.
It being admitted that there is such written
evidence, no other evidence of an inferior na-
ture can be received — ^I need not go into a
variety of distinctions, into which cases ad-
judged may vary themselves. The evidence
of tne fact here to be established is contained
in a written paper;— it must be proved some
"way by inferior evidence, if the direct cannot
be had ; — but no evidence save something to
prove that paper can be received. Suppose an
action brought upon a bond— the bond is
in court — can any evidence be received
but evidence of that bond — the hand-
writing of the witness, or the admission of
the party ?— Could your lordship receive (its
admission that he owed a debt to Ifaat
amount?— You could not, becaose ther^ittust
be an acknowledgment of the bof^ itself;
because other kind of evidence is not #i iiife-
rior kind of evidence for the support of the
muniment in question ; but other ^ideace iv
evidence, giving up altogether tbe^evidence of
the muniment, ana substttutlng a totally dis-
tinct proof in its place. So, niy lord, there
may be many ways of protifiog the contents of
a paper; but no mere dedaratioli of the party,
not eatablisbiog %ktA p«per— or admitting

the signature to that paper-*or glViw autho-
rity to it, can be received io a court ofjustict.
And it is upon the wimt principle^— to preveot
the eross and'abommable tafiut of periury,
which may arise from evidence of that kind.
Tha man producing a recorded isstniment,
must prove the instrument itself-^-no other
evidence can be received—-^

Mr. Justice J^oam^f.— Do you mean to ny
that DO other possible proof of tiie pvbHcaoon
of a paper can be given, but that etffidavit
which tne legislature aUot^s to be evidence ?

Mr. Cttrmn.— My lord, I do not contend
for that ; because it may be proved by many
other ways. But where there is a particular
authoritative piece of evidence, and that is
brousht into court, and aought to be made the
Ibundation of a fact necessary to be esta-
blished against the traverseri any collateral
or aecondarv evidence of that ftct is not ad-
missible, when the primary evidence may be
had.-^That is the argument which I submit
to your lordship's judgment.

Now, suppose I am eno«eoiis, see what the
evidence is. First^ thev wanted to prove that
the paper charged in the libel was published
by the traverser, and what is the evidence
given ?-— The witness said, I went in and ar-
rested the man, and he said he was the pob-
lisher of ^ The Press"— I do not rest upon that
proceeding — taking a man hy the throat, and
repeating what he may have said under the
surprise and terror of imprisonment.— But
I ask this ques^^— Has he sakl, he was the
publisher of the psper in question ? That pa-
per eontainine tne libellous publication, as it
18 called, and whdch has been read in court ?
or that he was at the time of that publication,
the proprietor of that paper f-*-Soppo8e the
question was, the execution of adeea — *^ have
yon executed it f — « Yes** ** When ?*»— «0»
emuM, — Se here he adoiits himself the pub-
lisher of the paper at the time he was seised ;
but did the sage questioner ask, whether lie
was the publisher at the time this paper was
published— or that he was publisher a week
before the arrest? — No : and now the argument
is-^he admitted he was the publisher on Sa-
turday, therefore he must have been the pidi>-
lisfaer on Monday before — seven days of p^ce
more^A week is half as good as o Ibrtnigfat.
**To ^hat time is the admissicm to extrad }
He might have been the publisher at the
tifkie of the arrest-^ut why not aiknw another
weak, because no time nms against the
ero wn f Why npt allow a month N-A year f
, ^-^If the declaration of a man diamw him
with responsibility is to be carriM nurther
back than the full extent of bis own coa<iBs-
sion, where is the good for which the Court
sits, and a jury is called, if coiQectnrea be a
good ground upon which any man oan Me
found ^ilty ef a criminal charge f«— I ask, is
this evidence,, suppose it eveQrwerd troe?^-
Suppose the man did state, whsn major Sirr
went in— ^* I am thepublieherof * ThePreao.**'
^--Bitt here is a paper only six orseveadays

MO)

Jor a Se^iotu UM.

A. D. 1797.

t9i50

l>efore» tnd Ibett it is md wbal likdihood is
there tbei^he wm the publisher of that very

¥iper ?--^'niat b ceqjecUire— it is not proof/'
here is no forgery in the similitude of types :
-«*Biit it vooldoe curious to convict a man,
heoause of such a similitude between one
newspaper and another.*— Your lordship may
recoUcet an objectioB taken, not upon so
strong a ground as thi% in the case of the
King V. Mbbf* with regard to a paper that is
now dead--The Nonhem SUar. It I remem-
ber right the objection was then allowed.

Mr. Justice Dowme$, — But all the rest of the
judges thought the allowance of that objection
was wrong.

Mr. C«rran.«-Tl know, my lord, they did.
The case was this :— The amdavit of the de-
fendant did state^ that he was the proprietor
of the paper at the time of the affidavit made ;
— it waaol)|ected, that it did not show him to
be the proprietor at the time of the publicar
tion. The Court allowed that dsjection, and
aftsrwaids the judges thought the allowanoeof
i| was unconsidered, because the statute says,
a new affidavit shall he made of the change
of property, and therefore that affidavit ' was
evidence to go to the jury. But there is a dis*
tiaction between that case and this— the
judges were wrong therein not receiving that
previous admisaiun of the publication; but there
10 a wide difference between acting upon an
admission prog^<essivelyy and retrospectively,
niere the opinion was erroneous, because it
was strong ground to suppose, that he, who
by a public act said he was pubhsher, conti*
mied lo be so, as he did no public act to show
the coirtrsry. But here it is merely the loose
assertion of a witness, statioe, that upon
a time whtepioU to the allegea publication,
the tmverser did admit, he was then the pub-
lisher. Upon this ground, mjr lord, I submit,
that what is offered is not evidence to show
that iku paper was published by the traverser
at the bar.

Mr. AUornejf Genero/.-^-My lord, I do not

• '< Kingi'Bench^ November, Uth, 1794.

'' The King againtt the Proprietors of The
Northern Stxr.

** At this trial at bar (which was an issue of
traverse of an indictment for publuhing a se-
ditious libel),

'^LordCLOHKELx., CAief /Hifice, mentioned,
that on a former trial of Rabb (the printer of
the same newspapfr) a point had arisen, whe-
ther t)ie affidavit lodged in the Stamp-office,
mnrauant to the statute 93 and M Geo. 3rd, c.
96. s. 1, was evidence of more than that the
deteudant was printer of the paper, at the
time of makimg the effideimt ; that the Court
had then ruled this in &vour of the defendant,
but that they had since conferred with the
uttier judges, who had evemiled this decision/'
Ridgwscr, Lapp, and $choales's Irish T. R.
Sit.

kAiw whether your lordship thinks it neces-
sary for me to say any thing in answer. The
learned counsel argues a question which does
not arise ; for this case must go to the jury,
aud I in full confidence rest, t&t there is evi-
dence to go to the jui^, and such as, if there
be no other to afiect i^ will he sufficient to
convict the prisoner. The question now is
not whether the affidavit was made by the
prisoner — but whether the prisoner be the
publisher of the libel or not? — ^And the imme-
diate question now is,, whether there be any
evidence given that he is the publisher i — I
rely upon it, that there is evidence of the pub-
lication, exclusive of the affidavit altogether.
The act of parliament upon this subject did
not intend to alter the nature of evidence, or
the power of a prosecutor to convict ; but it
endeavoured to nave a permanent species of
evidence always within reach to be produced
against a publisher. Here a part of the evi-
dence which the legislature intended to pro-
eure is wanting, and we now come without
that evidence to show Uiat the prisoner did
publish this paper. It is not your lordshio's
province tp say the prisoner iid publish ttie
iibel ; but to say, whether there is evidence
to go to the jury. >

See what the evidence is, exclusive of the
affidavit: that a paper was published at No. 4,
Church-lane, that the letter in question was
in that paper, and when the mamstrate w^nl
to arrest the prisoner he was asked. Was he
the publisher? He said he was, and there-
fore he was arrested. I do most che^fiilly
meet the gentlemen, and put the case to the
jury, whether there is evidence for them to
consider, and deliberate upon, though the
gentlemen say, there is no evidence against
the man, acknowledging himself to be the
publisher of the paper, and livins in that very
nouse where the paper was bought.

Mr. Cttfrea.— The affidavit elates, that the
traverser lives in Mountrath-street.

Mr. Mtarn^ Genera/.— Then Mr. Curran
has recourse to the affidavit which states the
paper to be printed at No. 4, Church-lane,
where the prisoner was arrested.

Mr. Justice Downef.— There is evidence for
the jury, exclusive of the affidavit. The pa-
per was bought at No. 4, Church-lane, by
one witness, and another witness found the
prisoner there ; he acknowledged his name,
and that he published that paper. In my ap-.
prehension that is evidence for the jury.

iHere the case vnts rested.
["he jury intimated a desire to ask the
commissioner of stamps a question; it was
granted.]

Was there ever any person registered as the
proprietor and publisher of The Press," but
one ? — ^No,

Mr. Sumpten —Had you any kind of know-
ledge by which to assert that? Do you know
any thing of the registry ?— No.

By tile /tif^.— Could there be any other re-
gistered wUhout your ItnowMge ^— No.

951] 36GEORGB IIL

Mr. Sampson. — ^There are other commis-
sioners of stamps? — There are.

They might take affidavits without your
knowledge? — I think not.

Mr. Attorney General, — It is for the pri-
soner to show, that another affidavit was
made, if there were any such.
. Mr. Sampton, — ^Then Mr. Attorney Greneral
gives up the affidavit which has been pro-
duced.

Mr. Attorney General, — T give up nothing ;
but I say, that if the prisoner rests his de-
fence upon a second affidavit^ it is for him to
show it.

Mr. Curran, — I do not think that the law
throws such proof upon the traverser.

Mr. J. Shearet. — If they go upon the affida-
vit, th'ey must prove it ; or it must be given
up. The evidence now siven is incompatible.
If they ^o upon the affidavit, they give up the
other evidence ; or if they rely upon the affi-
davit, they must give up the rest: so that the
attorney-general must abandon the assertion,
that he gives up nothing.

Mr, Attorney General, — We give up nothing.
We rest our case here upon the part of the
Crown.

, . DEFENCE.

. Mr. Fletcher. —My Lord, and Gentlemen
of the Jury ; In this case I am counsel for the
traverser ; and I would not detain you half a
minute upon so humble a subject as myself,
but in truth, till within a few hours I did not
know I should have had this duty to discharge.
On returning home late last night, I found a
brief in this case lying on my table ; and when
I saw on the back of it the tsvo respectable
names of Mr. Curran and Mr. Ponsonby, who
have precedence of me, I thought I should
have nothing more to do, than assist in the
examination of the - witnesses ; but by some
means, no licence had been obtained for Mr.
Ponsonby. I merely offer this, that if I should
not be so well arranged as might be expected,
I may not be charged with inattention. Hav-
ing stated thus much, I shall trespass upon
your patience but a short time.

The traverser stands indicted for printing
and publishing a false, malicious, and sedi<
tious libel against the government of this
country. To establish that charge against
the traverser, you, gentlemen, must be con-
vinced of two things : — You must, in your
consciences, believe, and must, as honest
men, called upon to discharge the most so-
lemn of all duties, in the presence of your
icountry and your God, be satisfied of two nets,
in either of which if you have any doubt, you
ore bound by every thing which you hold dear
and sacred, to acqmt the traverser. Firsts you
must be convinced, that the traverser did print
and publish the paper in miestion : and after
having satisfied your minus of that prelimi-
nary question, then you are, secondly, to con-
sider, whether the paper-writing, spread upon
the record, be a laise^ maUcioga, and sedi-
tious libel or no^ .'

Trial of Peter Finerty

[959

With respect to the preliminary qnertion,
you have alreadv heard much said and ai^ed
upon to induce the Court to be of opinion, that
there was not sufficient evidence for you to de-
liberate upon ; but the disposal of that ques-
tion precludes not your province. You ara
now called upon to decide another question,
upon which the Court was not called upon to
decide. All that the learned judge decided
was, that there wad evidence for you to ezer*
cise ^our judgment and discretion upon from
the circumstances sworn to ; but upon thoae
circumstances you are now to judge, oiid be
convinced beyond the shadow of doubt, that
the traverser was the publisher of that paper,
which is stated to be a false, malicious, and
seditious libel.

Now, gentlemen, be pleased to advert to
the evidence of that fact; and if there be not
a cogency arising from it, if it do not flash
conviction unon your minds, the learned judge
will be the nrst to tell you, that it is the boast
of the criminal code, that where doubt and
hesitation prevail in the minds of reasonable
men, thejury are called upon to acquit. You
arc now called upon to aischarge your duty
in the eyes of your fellow-ciUaens, who can
exercise their reason as well as you upon the
evidence of the facts, who will exercise their
reason, and draw tluit inference which the
case will furnish. Every man is gifted by the
Almighty with faculties to draw the deductions
of reason. The public will exercise their dis»
cretion,and upon their determination will your
verdict stand or fall. See how imperiously
you are called upon to exercise with coolness,
and divested of passion as far as it is possible
for the human mind to be divested of it, that
discretion with which you have been entrusted
by the law, and see whether you have any
room to doubt, that the traverser was the puln
Usher of the paper.

See what the evidence is as to that fa^t:— •
you have evidence of an affidavit made by a
man statins himself to be Peter Finerty— an
affidavit taken in a dark room ; but as to the
identity of the person, or similitude of hand-
writing, you have not a tittle of evidence. As
the case stood upon that, to a demonstration,
no honest man, no man of reason, could draw
the conclusion, that Finerty was the identical
person who swore the affidavit, purporting
to be the affidavit of the traverser. There is
not an iota of evidence, which could weigh
with any reasonable mind, that the traverser
was the man.

What then is the farther evidence adduced
by the crown? A youns gentleman, Ibr his
private amusement, bougnt a paper, contain-
mg that letter signed Marcus, which is charged
as th« libel ; he carried it home, and gave it
to his &ther, with whom it remained. How
fJEir that hu established the fact against the
traverser, of publishing that individual paper,
you are to judge : because it has not been con-
tended, if a man once happens to be the p«d>-
lisher of a iiaper, that can fasten crimiiudity

958]

far a Siditioui Libd»

A. D. 1797.

C954

upon him aftenrtfrds. It possibly may fiMten- ^
negl^ence, or carelessness^ upon him ; but
does It establish, that he published afalse libel f
Examine, and see what the evidence is ; that
the witness bought a paper in a certain house;
not seeing Finerty, or having any communi-
cation with him. When you couple these
parts together, when you recollect tnat there
nasbeen a legislative interference, which took
IMray all doubt, namely, the necessity of a
printer lodgins in the Stamp-oiiice a copy of
every day's puolication, authenticated by his
own signature, what roust you think of a pro-
secution, which abandons the legislative proof,
and substitutes other evidence in its room ?
Does not this circumstance cogently press it-
self upon your consciences P What is oecome
of that paper which ought to have been lodged?
Was it deposited in the office ? If it were, and
produced, it might show that the traverser did
not authenticate that particular paper. Either
the paper was lodged, or it was not : if it were
not loQged, they bad no right to institute this
prosecution. They ought to have taken those
measures which the legislature has put into
their hands to establish the fact beyond con-
troversy. If the paper were lodged, I turn it
upon them, and say, that the non-production
of it must raise a suspicion, that it may have
been authenticated by some other signature
than that of the traverser. Therefore the
non-production of that paper is a powerful ar-
gument indeed, and makes the case of the
prosecution infinitely weaker than if no affi*
davit bad ever been directed — if no legislative
line had been pointed out for them to pursue.
Because, if they omitted what they had in
their power to enforce, they were ^ilt^ of
gross negligence, and bad no right to mstitute
this prosecution. If they were not so negli-
gent, why not produce the paper ? One of two
things must inevitably follow: either they
were negligent, in not having the paper depo-
sited ; or, if they were not negligent, but tnat
it was deposited, then the inference follows
by implication of law, that the production of
it would damn their cause, by showing that
the traverser had not authenticated, by his
sigoatore, that indivklual paper, containing
the libel charged in the indictment.

Therefore, gentlemen, you see I have gone
through two stages or modes resorted to for
the purpose of authenticating this paper. Af-
ter a considerable pause, lo enable the gen-
tlemen for the crown to eke otit their evi-
dcnce, if peradventure it could be done, a wit-
ness was produced, who said, that when Fi-
nerty was arrested, he acknowledged himself
to be the printer and publisher of ''The Press."
Bid he own himselr to have been the printer
of the paper in question? No such thing.
Therefore there is nothing by which men of
reason or common sense can fasten crimi-
nality upon the traverser. This point has al-
tcwlybaen argued byMr. Curran; therefore
I ^hall; take up no more of your time upon it
at this late hour ; but remind you again of the

obligation imposed upon you, that if you have
any doubt or nesitation upon the fiict, whether
the traverser did publish this particular paper,
you are called upon by your consciences, by
your oath, your duty to your feliow-citizensa
by the spirit of the English law, and the cri-
minal code established here, to acquit the tra-
verser.— But if, gentlemen, contrary to my
real opinion, and what I cannot believe (ex-
cept you have some private reason, or private
knowledge not disclosed, and if you have yon
should come forward and offer yourselves to
be examined — it is not too late), you should
be satisfied, that the traverser did in fact pub-
lish this very paper ; then you will have to
consider the second question in the cause.

Gentlemen, the second question which you
have to consider is, whether the paper stated
in the indictment be a/a^e, ma/ictota, and se-
ditiout libel, or not? You are the iudges to
determine upon that, and you will determine
it yourselves. Gentlemen, it is not many
years back (not quite five years) since the old
common law of the land was restored by an
act of parliament in both countries. Ante-
cedent to that, there had been a sort of trench-
ing upon the old law relating to libels.* The
juries were told, that with regard to tlie ques-
tion of libel, they had nothing to do; they
were to find the fact of publication merely,
and the judge was to determine upon the re»
cord, whether the matter was libellous or not.
That doctrine is gone to sleep, and peace be
with it Gentlemen, it now belongs to you
to determhie, whether the paper charged be
false, malicious, and seditious, or not; be-
cause it is not sufficient to call a paper a libel;
it must be false ; and if it tie, malice, by im-
plication of law, attaches upon it; and when
that is done, then, by implication of law, if
it relates to the government, sedition alsu at-
taches upon it: since no man can say, if the
matter published be false, that he was not in-
stigatea by malicious motives, and when ma-
licious motives appear in a matter relating to
government, sedition is attached upon it

Then, gentlemen, the question occurs, are
the matters charged, false f And is there
that presumption arising firom them, that
fi'om the mere statement of them they ap-
pear to be false ? Several passages have been
selected, and the first of them slated by the
attorney-general relates to the conviction of a
person of whom you have all heard, of the
name of William Orr : that the conviction was
had upon the testimonjr of a man, who ap-
pearea to have been perjured. It is not stated
oy the publication, whether tlie circumstances
from which perjury was attached upon the
man were disclosed antecedent to the convic-
tion, or not'; therefore I have a right to sup-
pose what is roost favourable to my client,
and what must have been the case, to recon-
cile the verdict to any principle of reason or

justice ; I am to suppose, that those circiun-

- ^ - - - - —

• See vol, 2«, p. 8M. .

959] 38 GEORGE III.

ilMioes mlgbr not arise durinc the trial. I
must feel persuaded, tbat if tney arose dur-*
ing the trial, so as to exclude all kiod of cre-
dit from the witness, the learned judge would
bave taken the case from the determinatioo
of the jury. I understand there was but one
single witness — [Here Mr. Fletcher was told
there were two witnesses] — ^I understand there
were two witnesses, but only one of them
awore to the nature of the oath. Thus, I
afaall take it for granted, that antecedent to
the oonviction, there did not appear sufleient
oircumstances to enable the learned judge to
atate to the jury his doubts of the creoit of
tlie witness, and therefore conviction followed.

Gentlemen, I am recapitulating the char|^,
taking it in the most offensive way, and if I
oan put it in any point of view in which it
cannot be false, malicious and seditious, you
must acquit the traverser.

I stated, that conviction followed the evi-
dence ; but what followed that ? We are pre*
pared with evidence to show, that intimida-
tion was used where intimidation should not
have been used— that drink was introduced,
where the verdict should have been the re-
sult of oool and sober reflection— in a case
wher* the suspicion of our criminal code
awears a man to keep the jury from all man-
ner of meal or drink, or any thing that may
^1 thethou^ts of a jury Irom the subject
naAter of their deliberation. Gentlemen, if
the fact be so, that drink did get in amons
Ihe jury ; that certain of them were tnfluenosa
by liquor, and that weakness and imbcsiUty
of understanding not completely in its pro-
ver tone and aawiled by otners^if this be the
tad, and that certain of the jury did sanction
aesections of this kind by solemn declaration
upon cath, what are you to say of such a veru
diet? If it should anpear to you, that there
were otjier affidavits fastening upon Ihe testiF-
mony of the witness a reasonable doubt of
perjury, I go 90 farther. If those affidavits
did come up to the executive magistrale^if
he had an opportunity of readii^ them, what
shall I say to thai measure of government
which did not think proper to interpose be-
tween the prisoner and human imbecility and
P^ist^cy* Mid snatch away the victim of
both r What imputatkm falls upon that ma-
gistrate it is not for me to say. I only state
what I am instructed will appear. What
shall you aay to that pact of the paper which
charges the verdict to have been obtained by
peijuiy i There is nothing proved to warrant
the statement that it is charged to have been
procured by the govemment of the country.
There are no expressions stating it to have
b«Ba so; and are vou, in cases wheve you
should be governed by the rules of conxmon
parlance, to sit ^ramraatical weigheis of wards,
m affiatne crimmality upon any man? Is it
not usuaTto say^ when a. man has peQured
himself without the knowledge of the orown,
and A vetdict is had, that such veidict was
obtained by perjury f It does not insinuate

Trial qfPOer Finerty

1958

that the crown procured the perjury. The
learned leader qi Mm prosecution would spura
at such an idea; I know he would. But
what ground is there io state as an inference
from thb publication, that the writer did
chaise such a Uitii Such ^ idea cannot hy
fair oeduction be elicited from the paper:— il
only says, that the verdict proceeded firooi
peijury ; and the subsequent part, if true, snl-
ficiently establishes what \ have already
slated, namely that after the jur^r retired lmi>
the bar, a verdict was procured in a manner
that it ought not to be.

Then, eentJemen, X am warranted to pot
any possible case for my client; it is for you
to say, whether any thing ^in alleviation be
established by evidence. Suppose that, with
the knowledge of those whose duty it was tk»
know it, thb verdict was had upon the testi-
mony of a man, where there was a reasonable
suspicion that he did not discover the prisoner'a
motive— that the verdict was procured by in-
timidation and the iotroduction of drink into
the jury box ; suppose these &cts to be estabo
lished ; suppose the evidence we meantomve
should induce you to believe, that the ve Act
was' had by perjury, by intimidation, b/
drink — I ask you what the feelings of any he-
nest man roust be at such a lamentable pic-
ture of the criminal justice of the country P
I call upon you to give it a name : is there any
too strong in this paper. Supposing the facta
to be true, docs human languag^e furnish wonU
or epithets black enough to paint it?

Gentlemen, it is not for me to state how it
took place; I am stating, that it did take
pkice; and we will show stronger evidence
•f the fiM:t than the counsel for the crown
showed of the fact of publication ; evidence nf
what paased in the jury room, and evulence
respecting the character of that man, who
stood in such a situation as to have a reason-
able doubt raised, whether he told truth, or
not. What must be the impression upon yotv
minds after such evidence shall be given ?

Gentlemen, this is stated to be a prosecu-
tion in vindicatk)n of government, and the
administration of justice. If these lacts be
true, I stand forward mora complet^ the
advocate of the government, and the justice
of the country, by endeavouring to convince
you of that honest indignation which every
honest man must feel at the recital of them,
and which must have influenced the writer of
the publication in auesti<m : for, nntkaseiif
do you imagine, tnat I am the aSvocate of
the libeller of the justice of the land ? God
forbid! Educated from myeariiest days in
a knowledge of the laws and constitution ;
with a character unstained ; white as»ths rube
of ermine; I challenge any man to cast an
imputation upon me. Does any man think
I would support a publication if I thought it a
libel upon the justice of the land ? No; the
indostrsr of any man will only show, that from
human inadvertence such a thing lAigbt taice
plaee ; hut from the fsneral ^ompeaion of our

957]

fw a Seditiaut HM.

A. D, 1797.

[958

ImI proceedino it could not Is the jmtice
oftiic land implicated in this charge \ God
forbid ! W hat is implicated in it f Any ge-
neial system of the government ?*-*No. But
that in tbisindividuS respect, supposing what
I stated to be true, the most amiable prerogir
tive of the crown ; the flower that should
bloom with never* fading lustre ; was not ev-
erted. If it was not, I am willing to suppose
it was occasioned by some of those moments
of lassitude arising firom an aocunmlation of
business :— I am to lament it. But what is
the privilege of the press — the freedom which
you are called upon to preserve ? Does it
consist in exposing the errors of men in
their private capacity--or poisoning the
source of domestic felicity? No such thine :
that is the abominable licentiousness of the
press, which ought to be restrained. But,
eentlemen, when you are told, that the li-
berty of the press Is the support of every free
government — what is it ? Is it not the pri*
vilege of man, bonA fide^ to state before the
tribunal of the public, a public abuse } For
what purpose is the press to call upon a pub-
lic officer, but to correct an error, if it be cap-
able of correction? If not to caution htm
a^nst committing it again ? What is the
right, if errors cannot be attributed to the go-
vernment ?

Gentlemen, you are told, that this is the
blackest of all libels. It contains strong lan-

fuaee. But the question is — \%\\faUe^ I
ola in my hand a paper, called a libel ; pro-
secuted as such before a juiy of England, the
celebrated letter which Junius wrote to the
king. What are the passages in that paper?
It is too late to take up your attention witli
many of them. One or two I will read :

*' The people of England are loyal to the
house of lianuvcr, not from a vain preference
of one family to another, but from a convic-
tion that the establishment of that family was
necessary to the support of their civil and re-
Itgknis liberties. This, sir, is a principle of al-
legiance equally solid and rational, fit for
Englishmen lo adopt, and well worthy your
majesty's encouragement. We cannot be
long deluded by nominal distinctions. The
name of Stuart, of itself is only contemptible,
—armed with the sovereign authority, their
principles were formidable. I'he prince who
imitates their conduct, should be warned bv
their example; and while he plumes himself
upon the security of his title to the crown,
should remember, that as it was acquired by
one revolution, it may be lost by another."

Again, the same writer says— '^ The peo-
ple of Ireland have been uniformly plundered
and oppressed. In return they give you every
day fresh marks uf their resentment. They
despise the miserable governor you have sent
Ihem, because he is.tlie creature of lord Bute:
not is it from any natural confusion hi their
idoM, that they are so ready to - confound the
origiBalof a king with the disgraceful repre-
sentatiOBofhlm/'

' Gentlemen, why have I read lo much Irom
that celebrated letter F It is notorious, that
Woodfall,* the printer, was prosecuted for
that letter, and found guiltyof publishing only.*)-
No J4idgment ever followed that verdict; ana
Gentlemen, if before a jury of Englishmen, in
the heart or London where majesty itself re-
sides and not the delegated representative of
political power, the kmg was told, thatAii
titU to tk€ crown wa» acquired bifoiu revalutiQn
and might be Imt by another^ whence comes
the assertion of the counsel, that such a fla-
gitious libel as the present is not to be found
m the annals of the law ? I put them side by-
side— judM between them. There the whole
code of the law was called in question — the
prosecution of Wilkes and several others was
called in question. — Here the conviction of an
individual is said to have been had by #ays
that were not proper, and therefore he called
for mercy. If the freedom of the press in
England so far back, in the time of the Ame-
rican war, when rebellion raised its standard,
but whkh history calls a struggle for the
dearest rights of man — if this sort of attack
coukl be made in the midst of the city of
London, blessed with the presence of miyestv
itself, a just, humane and religious prince— if
Englishmen know the value of the oonstitii-
tion as Irishmen ought to do— af they found
publiaUhn onfy— Have I not a right to argue,
that, supposing this verdict against Orr to
have been obtained in the manner I have
stated, did it not call for the liberty of the
press to animadvert upon it, and does such
animadversion deserve the name of libtl f —
Does it deserve the name of libel to tell the
government to remedy that which, if not
remedied, might alienate the afiections of the
people? — I meddle not with thelangusge or
expressions of the paper ; these are but the
trappings and plumage of the bird. They are
inferior to the polished, two-edged sword of
Junius, but that is not the question :— the
question is, whether the writer b(mAfide slated
the fact ?— or whether, witli the malice of the
devil, he fabricated this story to bring disgrace
upon the cjovernment, and to alienate the af-
fections of the people from them ?— If he dkl
the latter, find him guilty— I am the first to
say you should. But. gentlemen, if there be
ground for saying it, what is the freedom of the
press? Does it consist in panegyrising go-
vernment,' and libelling independent menf
Does the liherty of the press consist in libel-
ling that bright offspring of your native soil, the
earl of Moira? Has he no sUke in the coun-
try ? Has he not bled in Hs cause? Is that
the liberty of the psess? Or is government
to be panegyrised, when it is wrong ? Would
it be the liberty of the press to say, supposing
the fjtcls stated to be true, that the trial af

Orr was satisfactory to every honest and good

11,1

* See his case, aal^, vol 90, n. 895.
f Sec also the case of Daniel Isaac Jkton,
ante, vol. 9%, p. 692.

959]

3S GEOROE III*

Trial ofPeier Finefly

[960

inaD f It is tru«, some sort of imputation
iras flung upon the witness who swore to the
criminality, but every honest man saw the
folly of it. As for drink, it was only to recre-
ate the weary spirits of the jury. Some sus-
tenance was necessary ; from weakness they
could not bring in such a verdict, omni ex-
ceptione major; no imputation attaches, but
the contrary, and shall government be blamed
fur carrying into execution a verdict so
found?— No such thing; but every paper
ffhall proclaim the correctness, the clemency,
and humanity of such a proceeding! — Is that
the liberty of the press?— If it be, it is not
that liberty which procured our present con-
stitution. That is not the liberty of the press,
which put down ship-money. — ^That is not the
liberty of the press which established the Ha-
beas Corpus act — ^That is not the liberty of
the press which brought the present king to
the throne, which he holds by the assent of
his people, and which I hope he may long en-
joy. W hat are we not inaebted to the press
for ? Was it not the libels upon the Catholic re-
ligion which produced the Reformation ? Was
it not the pre^s which prevented mone;r being
taken from the subject ? The publications of
the press, in the business of the Seven Bishops
put down the dispensing power. To what do
you owe the British constitution ? Did some
man catch the divine illumination from hea-
ven, and promulgate it to the people? No :
but abuse heaped upon abuse of their rights,
roused them to a sense of their privileges.
Was it panegyrics upon the governments
which corrected their errors P — Certainly not.
Therefore, gentlemen, I come home to that
which I set out from. — ^The liberty of the press
is that inherent right in every man to anim-
advert upon the abuses of government, and
which right has produced every other right,
which you now enjoy. Government can go
on without panegyric ; they can be comforted
without it; they do not call every day for
food of that species. His excellency can live
without it. But I ask you again, does the li-
berty of the press consist in panegyrising go-
vernmenty or libelling individuals obnoxious
to them ?

The case comes to this : You have the
authority of the attorney-general, that this is
a prosecution in which the liberty of the press
is concemed—I say so too. That it is to
vindicate the government of the state —
I say so too. That it is a prosecution
to vindicate the administration of justice
-—I say so too. It is a vindication m this
way, that if facts of that kind, which have
been stated, have taken place, and we have
' evidence sufficient to inauce reasonable men
to think so, the liberty of the press was well
exerted, whether discreelly-^whether with
genuine pure politeness, I cannot say -in
{publishing what it has. I am not aware that
you are appointed judges of the language of
.libels, or are impanelled to try what is the
politest mode or telling a man be has done

wrong. Is want of grammar, or of polite
breedmg to inflict a punishment upon the
traverser ?~No, gentlemen, you will say, that
if this be a publication, containing reproof for
improper conduct, that it is not fiJse, when we
la^ before you evidence to show that it is true.
If it be true, malice attaches not upon it ; and
it be not false, or malicious, where is the se-
dition ? — I shsdl not trouble you farther upon
this point.

Another part of this paper relates to the re-
call of lord Fitzwilliam. Is this prosecution
to vindicate the ways of Mr. Pitt, which are
marvellous indeed ! The paper then states, in
coarse and vulgar language, that there are
rapine, burnings and desolation throughout
the country. I call upon you to lav your
hands upon your hearts, as God shall judgie
you— Are tltere burnings and desolation
throughout Ireland. I put it in so many words.
Read the proclamations day afler day,
month after month, week after week. What
do they say ?^ What is it appears in the.4e po-
lite publications in which no libels are to bo
found ?— You know the papers I mean ? —
never libellous ; never contaminated. How
many parishes, baronies, and counties are put
out of the king's peace ? Are there these enor-
mities P — If there be,it is suflicient for themiao,
stating that desolation had taken place in tho
kingdom. The statement of these facts by
a noble peer is more to his honour than that
he derives his blood from the Plantagenets of
old. Lord Moira* offered to prove at the bar
of the House of Lords in England facts which
came within his own knowledge, vindicat-
ing his statement. Have vou not heard that
the same facts were offered to be proved at the
bar of your own House of Commons ? If not,
you are the onlv men in the commimity who
have not heard it. What follows? Could
such a statement be made by that illustrious
man, if it were not founded ? I trust Yie will
come here and make the same statement.
Was not his ofler of proof refused ? What
follows? Was there not reasonable ground
to state that disturt»ance and desolation fol.
lowed the advancement of the present execu-
tive magistrate? Was there any foundation
for stating, that lord Fitzwilliam ought not lo
have been removed? That measures which
would have reconciled five-sixths of the sub-
jects were ready to take place had he remained:
and I ask you, was the writer justified in put-
ting upon paper, that much misery has fol-
lowed the change of the government? Or
can you say, against a mass of evidence, that
the writer invented all this in the malignity
of his heart ? The counsel for the crown sakl,
never was malice so diabolical, staling deso-
lation and burnings. Have you seen nothing
of them ? — have you seen no appearance of a
military government ^ Do you say it is all
conjecture? All fancy? Or not fancy,*but
diaouliad invention, batched by Lucifer to

* See the New Pari. Hist., vol. 3VP* .1008.

>■

Ml]

Jor a Seditiotu Libel*

A. D- 1797.

[962

vilUfy the ktug*« government F If it be no,
fifid the traverser guilty. You ought to show
it is false. Convince the world by your verdict
If that be your mode of reasoning — if ^ou
are so convinced — 6nd a verdict against him.
I am the first to call for it.

Gentlemen, you have been of\en told of
the blessings of the constitution, aud you are
desired to look at the sister kingdom. J call
upon you to look at her with a steady eye.
Look at the conduct of juries in that Cfuintry
—Look at their conduct m the case of Tooke^—
Their verdict in the case of Thelwall and
Hardy.* In all these, brought forward by the
existing administration to feci the pulse of
the people, the prosecutors were defeated, and
therefore the public peace suffered no disturb-
ance there. Look at England then with a
steady eye — ** oculo irretorio*' — If you take a
lesson from that country, do not imitate her
when she is wrong; but deviate sometimes
into rectitude.

Gentlemen, I shall not trouble you with
any other passage, or others which are of an
in/erior nature ; but shall take leave with ad-
juring you to consider, whether there be evi-
dence to convince you, that the traverser did
))ublish this paper; and if you should be sa-
tisfied of that, then to consider well whether
it be false, and intended as a malicious misre-
presentation of facts. I have been educated
in a respect for the laws. I continue to have
a respect for them, and I am the first to con-
jure you to find him euilty, if you are satisfied
of those facts. But ifhe be a well-intentioned
man, having a reasonable ground to induce
him to think there was something wrone^ he
was well warranted to use the liberty or the
press, in staging such matter, and in such case
you cannot find him e;uilty, because by so
doing, you would findthe matter to be false
and seditious, when you were convinced it was
not.

The Right Honourable Bany lord Telverton^'f
Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exche-
quer, examined.

I beg your lordship to look at the hand-
writing subscribed to that affidavit ? — ^That is
my hand-writing, I believe.

And that [showing a second affidavit] ?-—
I believe the name Yelverton subscribed to
this, is my hand- writing.

Your lordship tried William Orr ?— I did.

You transmitted a recommendation from
the jury to the lord lieutenant ? — I did. .

Does your lordship recollect how often he
was respited ? — According to the best of my
recollection he was respited twice. Three
times, if I may mention the respite of his
execution at the assizes to transmit the re-
commendation of the jury, I then sent to Mr.

* See tho S4th and S5th Volumes of this
collectien.
f Aflerwardfl Viscount Avonmore.
VOL, HKVI.

Pelham;* I had an answer, that the lord
lieutenant was not in town, had no opportu-
nity of consulting, and therefore, fo^ the pre-
sent, he could do no more thin recommend a
respite for ten days. As well as I recollect,
I postponed the sentence for sixteen days, in
order to give time for the recommendation of
the jury, and what other recommendation the
unfortunate man could procure to enforce its
effect, if any he could. I recollect that after
I came to town, another respite was granted
for a few days, I believe from Monday to
Thursday, and then farther for a few days
more. I cannot be precise.

Does your lordship know the Rev. Dr.
Macartney's hand-writing? — I do not recol-
lect that I ever saw him write ; I know him
very well ; I knew him so long ago as when
we were in colleee together ; but I cannot
say whether this £e his hand-writing, or not.
Does your lordship know whether Dr. Ma-
cartney laid any document before government
respecting Whcatly ? — ^There was.

Can you say whether that was the docu-
ment ?— I cannot.

What was the nature of the document he
laid before government ; was it an imputation
upon the character of Wheally ?

Mr. Attorney General. — My lord, I object
to any parol evidence being given of the con-
tents of any paper or affidavit.

Lord Fe/rer/an.— Sitting where I am, I am
in the judgment of the Court, whether I
should answer; but I would have it under-
stood, that I have no personal objection to
the question.

Mr. Justice Downet.^^1 understand from
the statement of counsel, that the traverser
xneans to offer this evidence by way of jus-
tification; is that the object of it?
Mr. Sampton. — ^Yes, my lord.
Mr. Justice Downes.—l am decidedly of
opinion that such evidence is not admissible.
Mr. Sampson, — Does your lordship permit
me to ask as to the state of the country ?
Will your lordship permit me to ask the wit-
ness, what has come to his actual knowledge ?
Mr. Attorney General,— My lord, 1 object
to such evidence ; it has no relation to this
trial.

Mr. Justice Doipnef.— It has been held at
all periods of time as the law of the land, that
such evidence is not admissible.

Mr. Samptftn. — Does your lordship hold it
not to be admissible, to go into evidence of
the truth of the libel?

Mr. Justice Doumes. — I do expressly hold
it. I am clear thai such evidence is not ad-
missible

Mr. Orr.— After what has fallen from your
lordship, it is with very great deference I

♦ Thechief Secretary to theLord Lieutenant.
He was. appointed 8ecreUryof Sute for the
Home Department in 1801. ' On the death of
his father in 1805, he became Earl of Chi-
ehester.

3 Q

963]

i8 GEORGE III.

Trial afPtler Finerty

L964

should ofTf r any thing with a hope of shaking
your opinion upon the point as to the truth (n*
the publication, in order to enable the jury
to determine whether it be a libel or not

Mr. Justice Doomes, — I hold the law to be
50 cltar in the time of lord Coke, and since,
upon this point, that it is not now admissible
to debate. The act of parliament which

Ijassed in England, relating to the trial of
ibels, and the proceedings attending the
passing of that act, have put us in possession
of an authority too strong to admit of debate.
The authority I allude to is the question put
t^ the twelve judges of England, when the
bill Was in progress through l)oth Houses of
Parliament. — One of the questions was — ** Is
the truth or falsehood of the written or printed
paper material, or to be left to the jui^* upon
the trial of an indictment or information for
a libel ; "or does it make any difference in this
respec^ whether the epithet falie be, or be
not used in the indictment or information P"
And to that question, the judges answered
unanimously, " That the truth or falsehood
of a written or printed paper is not material,
or to be left to the jury on the trial of an
indictment or information for a libel. We
consider this doctrine so firmly settled, and
so essentially necessary to the maintenance
of the king's peace, and the good order of
society, that it cannot now m drawn into
debate." ♦

Mr. Orr, — Mv lord, all that I shall mention
now is, that in the case of the Seven Bishops,f
who were tried for a libel upon the king's
government in decrying the dispensing power,
they were permitted to give evidence of the
truth of their writine* and the rolls of parlia-
ment were produce^ to show that, by law,
the king had no such power ; and I do not
consider the decision of Powell and Holloway,
the judges who admitted that evidence, as
less constitutional, because they were dis-.
plwctd by king James for that opinion.

Mr. Justice Doanes. — If I required any
authority to strengthen the opinion I l^ive
given, the act of parliament would strengthen
It; because the opinion of the judges in
England was given during the progress of the
bil^ through the two Houses of Parliament :
the legislature had the unauinlous opinion of
all the judges, and they have not thought fit
to alter the law in that particular by the act
of parliament, either in England or Ireland.

E, Cooke J esq. sworn.

You hold a situation in the Secretary's
office ? — I do.

Do you recollect a recommendation having
been transmitted to your office from the judges
who tried Orr, as the recommendation of the
jury for mercy?— I recollect such a recom-
niendation was transmitted.

Do you recollect any paper being brought

voL ««, p. «9a
t Sec the cast, mUi, vol. It, p. 188:

to yom- office respecting tbt trial of Orr, bjr a
person of the name ot Macartney, a justice
of peace.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— I object to that
question.

Mr. Jld^Nally.^-^1 only ask as to the fact
of the paper bemg sent I do not ask what
the contents were.

Mr. Justice Downa. — How does that bear
upon this case?

Mr. M'Nalfy, — ^To show that the mercy,
which was recommended, was denied.

Mr. Attorney General, — Undoubtedly, Orr
was convicted and executed.

Mr. M*Nally [to the witness].— Did not
the jury recommend mercy to be extended t

Mr. Attorney General, — I object to that
question; this is an attempt to prove the
truth of the libel.

Mr. Justice Downes. — ^You are in possession
of my opinion, that such matter is not examin-
able mto.

Mr. Curran, — My lord, I do not feel that
we have any evidence, not subject to the ob-
jection now made. It was our intention to
have offered a good deal of evidence as to
some concomitant facts ; but under the opi-
nion which your lordship seems to cuter tarn,
I do not think that such evidence can stand
entirely clear of the objection founded upon
that opinion. And though such evidence
might oe offered under distmctions that might
effectually keep clear of ^our lordship's opi-
nion, yet we do not think it would be acting
with candour to attempt it. Therefore, my
lord, we say, we do not mean to offer any
more evidence, and with your lordship's per-
mission, I wish to address some observations
to your lordship, and to vou, gentlemen of the
jury, upon the nature of'^the charge now be-
fore you, and upon the grounds upon which it
does -appear to my humble judgment, it is
your duty to consider the case, and also unon
the extent of the authority which the law iias
given you in cases of tliis kind.

And, gentlemen, in the perikMis and agitated
state of this unhappy country, I do not know
a more important questk>n for your consider- .
ation than that now submitted to yoo. I am
sorry any thing has been said on either side
to bias your mind, and to disturb that deli-
berate reflection whose decision alone can
give quiet, if quiet can be given to the public,
and to bear that character which ought to be
staniiped upon eveiy honest verdict oT a jury.

Oentlemrn, however I may regret it, I
cannot but observe into how great a latitude
of statement this case has been branched. —
Gentlemen, you are standing in an awful
situation indeed !— The ntuation of the eountry
has been adverted to— you must feel ir, and
you must feel, that under all that agitation of
public mind, you are called upon to decide a
cause affecting the liberty of a fellow-subj^t,
who has not had the privilege of calling one
of you as his judge, or of objecting to ooe of
you as not altogether iodiflbrent in the cause.

965]

Jhit u SedUioiu IaM.

A. D. 1797.

[956

N«verilidlleelmj8«if sofunk under the
importance of eny cause : to apeak to a quea*
tion of this kind at any time would require
the greatest talent and the most matured de-
libention ; but to be obliged without either
of tliose advantages to speak to a subject that
hath so deep]|y shaken the feelings of this
already irritated and agitated nation, is a task
that fills me with embarrassment and dismay.

Neither m^ learned colleague nor myself
received any instruction or license until after
the juiy were actually sworn, and we both of
us came here under an idea that we should
not take any part in the trial. This circum-
atnce I mention, not as an idle apologj^ for
aa e£fort that cannot be the subject of either
praise or censure, but as a call upon you, gen*
tlemen of the juiy, to supply the defects of
my efforts, by a double exertion of your atten-
tion.

Perhaps I ought to regret tliat t cannot
begin with any compliment, tha^ may recom-
mend me or my client personally to your fa-
'vour. A more artful advocate would probably
begin his address to you by compliments on
your patriotism, and by felicitating his client
upon the happy selection of his jury, and
vpon that unsuspected impartiality jn which,
it he were innocent, he must be safe. You
must be consciousygentlemen, thai such idle
▼erbiage as that could not convey^eitber my
sentiments or my client's upon that subject.
Vou know and we know upon what occasion
you aie come, and by whom you have been
chosen ; vou are come to try an accusation
professedly brought forward b;^ the state,
chosen by a sheriff who is appointed by our
accuser.

[Here Mr. Attorney-general said, the sheriff
was elected by the city, and that that
observation was therefore unfounded.]

Be it so : I will not now stop to inquire
whose property the city may be consklered to
be, but the learned gentleman seems to forget,
that the election bv that city, to whomsoever
it may belong, is absolutely void without the
approoation of that very lord lieutenant, who
is the prosecutor in this case. I do therefore
repeat, eentleipen, that not a man of you has
been called to that box by the voice of my
client; that be has had no power to object to
m single man among you, though the crown
has: and that you yourselves must feel under
what influence you are chosen, or for what
qualifications you are particularly selected.
Yet let me say, I would not waste myself in
an unavailing defence, if I did not suppose
you to possess integrity of heart ; if I supposed
you the servile in^trumente of power, I would
acorn to plav upon ;f ou ; but I warn yon that
coolness aad impartiality of judgment has not
been the recommendation to the office which
you are now called upon to fill. At a mo-
ment when this wretched land is shaken to
iu centre by the dreadftd conflicts of the dif*
iarent bnmehta of the community I between

those who call themselves the partisans of
liberty, and those who call themselves the
partizans of power ; between tlie advocates
of infliction, and the advocates of suffering ;
upon such a question as the present, and at
such a season, can any man be at a loss to
guess to what class of character and opinion
a friend to either party would resort fof that
jury which was to decide between botli ? I
trust, gentlemen, you know me too well to
suppose that I could be capable of treating
you with any personal disrespect; I am
speaking to you m the honest confidence of
your feUow-citizen. When I allude to those
unworthy imputations of supposed bias, or
passion, or partiality, that may have marked
you out for your present situation, I do so in
order to warn you of the ground on which
you stand, of the awful responsibility in which
you are placed, to your conscience, and to your
country ; and to remind you, that if you have
been put into that box from any unworthy
reliance on your complaisance or your servi«
lity, you have it in your power before you
leave it to refute and to punish so vile an
expectation by the inteerity of your verdict;
to remmd you that you nave it in your power
to show to as many Irishmen as j[et linger in
this country, that all la^ and justice have not
taken their flight with our prosperity and
peace ; that the sanctity of an oath, and the
honesty of a juror are not yet dead amongst
us ; and that if our courts of justice are so
often superseded by so many strange and
terrible tribunals, it is not because they are
deficient either in wisdom or virtue.

Gentlemen, this is no cause of private de-
famation— it is not the case of a fibeller dis*
turbine the repose of a peaceful fire-side, or
wounding female honour, and exposing do-
mestic transactions to public view— but it is
the case, and so it has been stated in the first
instance, of a libel upon the executive raa*
sistrate of the country— a man holding the
highest situation which can be held in this
country, and therefore liable to be watched
and examined by all the subjects of it* The
man who exercises great official functions
must be liable to general observation, and
therefore if it be competent to the press to
speak of any man, it is competent to speak of
such a man and his measures*

Gentlemen, it is necessary that you should
have a clear idea, first of the law, bv which
this question is to be decided ; secondly of the
nature and object of the prosecution. As to
the first, it is my dutv to inform you that the
law respecting libels has been much changed
of late. — Heretofore, in consequence of some
decisions of the judges in Westminster-hall,
the juryvras conceived to have no province
but that of finding the truth of the innuendoe
and the fact of publication; but the libellous
nature of that publicatbn, as well as the guilt
or innocence or the publisher, were considered
as exclusively belonging to the Court. In a
system like that of law, which reasons logi-

967J 3S GEORGE Ul.

calhr, ^ on« erroneous principlt can be in-
troduced, without producing every other that
can be^educible from it. If in the premises
of any argument you admit one erroneous
proposition, nothing but bad reasoning can
save the conclusion from falsehood. 80 it
has been with this encroachment of the Court
upon the province of the jury with respect to
libels. The moment the Court assumed as a
principle that they, the Court, were to decide
upon everything but the publication; that
is, that they were to decide upon the question
of libel or no libel, and upon the guilt or inno-
cence of the intention, which must form the
essence of every crime; the guilt or inno-
cence roust of nebessity have ceased to be
material. You see, gentlemen, clearly, that
the question of intention is a mere question
of fact. Now the moment the Court deter-
inined that the iury was not to try that ques-
tion, it followed of necessity that it was not
to be tried at all ; for the Court cannot try a
question of fact. When the Court said that
it was not triable, there was no way- of
fortifying that extraordinary proposition, ex-
cept by asserting that it was not material.
The same erroneous reasoning carried them
another step, still more mischievous and un-
just : if the intention had been material, it
must have been decided upon as a mere fact
under all its circumstances. Of these circum-
stances the meanest understanding can see
that the leading one must be the truth or the
falsehood of the publication; but having
decided the intention to be immaterial, it
followed that the truth roust be equallv im-
material— and under the law so distorted, any
man in England who published the most un-
deniable truth, and with the purest intention,
might be punished for a crime in the most
ignominious manner, without imposing on the
prosecutor the necessitv of proving his guilt,
or giving the accused an^ opportunity of
showing his innocence. I am not m the
habit of speaking of legal institutions with
disrespect ; but I ant warranted in condemning
that usurpation upon the right of juries, by
the authority of that statute, by which your
jurisdiction IS restored. For that restitution
of justice the British subject is indebted to
the splendid exertions of Mr. Fox and Mr.
Erskine,----those distinguished supporters of
the conntitution and of the law ; and I am
happy to. say to you, that though we can
claim Ho share in the glory they have so
justly acquired, we have the full benefit of
th^ir success ; for you are now sitting under a
similar act passed in this country, which makes
it your duty and right to decide upon the
entire question upon the broadest* grounds
itnd under all its circumstances, and or course
to determine, by your verdict, whether this
publication be a false and scandalous libel:
lalse in fact, and published with the seditious
purpose alleged of bringing the government
into scandal, and instigating tlM people to
tQSurretlioH. "^ .

Trial of Ptiit Tintriy

1968

Having stated to you, gentlemen, the great
and exclusive extent of your jurisdiction, I
shall beg leave to recur to a distinction to
which I have alreadv alluded and which will
strike you at first sight ; and that is, the dis-
tinction between public animadversions upon
the character of private individuals, and those
which arc written upon measures of govern-
ment, and the persons who conduct them.
The former may ne called personal, and the
latter political publications. No two things
can be more different in their nature, nor la
the point of view in which they are to be coa*
sidered by a iury. The criminality of a mere
personal libel conusts in this, that it tends to
a breach of the peace ; it tends to provoke all
the vindictive paroxysms of exasperated
vanity, or the deeper or more deadly venge-
ance of irritated pride.— The truth is, lew men
see at once that they cannot be hurt so much
as they think by the mere battery of a news*
paper. They do not reflect that every charac-
ter has a natural station, from which it can-
not be effectually degi«ded, and beyond
which it cannot be raised by the bawling of a
news-hawker. If it be vrantonly aspersed, it
is but for a season, and that a short one, wbeQ
it emerges like the moon from a passing cloud
to its original brightness; it carnes wiui it an
inseparable anti(K>te in the avowal that it
comes from an enemy; and vainly will that
enemy bend the bow or feather the arrow, if
the point of it be not supplied by the conduct
of the intended victim. In vain may that
enemy revile, and harmless must be his in-
vective against any man, if he does not speak
of him that language to the world which his
own conscience speaks of him to himself. . It
is right, however, that the law and that you
should hold the strictest hand over this kind
of public animadversion, which forces humility
and innocence from their retreat into the
glare of public view; which wounds and
terrifies; which destroys the cordiality and
the peace of domestic litie; and which without
eraaicatine a single vice, or single folly, plants
a thousand thorns in the human heart.

In cases of that kind I perfectly agree with
the law, as stated from the bench ; in such
cases, I hesitate not to think, that the truth
of a charge ought not to justify its publication.
If a private roan is charged with a crime, he
ought to be prosecutecf in a court of justice,
where he mav be punished if it be true, and
the accuser if it be false; but fiv differently
do I deem of the freedom of political publica-
tion. The salutary restraint of the former
species, which I talked of, is found in the
^neral law of all societies whatever; but the
more enlarged freedom of t)ie press, for which
I contend in political publication, I conceive
to be foimded in the peculiar nature of the
British constitution, and to follow directly
from the contract on which the BrUish .go-
vernment hath been placed by the ievoliitiB&.
By the British coostHiition, the power of the
state is a trust, compitted by the ptopK

960]

for a Siditious Ubd.

A. D. 1797.

[970

upoo certaio conditions : by the Tiolaiion of
vrhicby it may be abdicated by those who
bold, and resumed by those who conferred it.
The real security therefore of the British
«ceptre is the sentiment and opinion of the
people, and it is consenuently their duty to
observe the conduct of the government ; and
it is the privilege of every man to ^ive them
full and just information upon that, important
aubject. Hence the liberty of the press is in-
separably twined with the liberty of the
peoole. The press is the ^at public monitor;
Its duty is that of the historian and the wit-
ness, that ** nil falsi audeat, nil veri non au-
deat dicere f that its horiion shall extend to
the farthest verge and limit of truth ; that it
shall speak truth to the king in the hearing
of the people, and to the people in the hear-
ing of the king; that it shall not perplex
either the one or the other with false alarm,
lest it lose its characteristic veracity, and be-
come an unheeded wamer of real danger ;
lest it should vainlv warn them of that sin, of
which the inevitaole consequence is death.
This, gentlemen, is the great privilege upon
which you are to decide ; and I have aetained
you the longer, because of the late change of
the iaw, and because of some observations
that have been made, which I shall find it ne*
cessary to compare with the principles I have
now laid down.

And now, gentlemen, let us come to the
immediate subject of the trial, as it is brought
before you, by the charge in the indictment,
to which it ought to have been confined; and
also, as it is presented to you by the statement
of the learned counsel, who has taken a much
wider range than the mere limits of the accu-
sation, and has endeavoured to force upon
your consideration extraneous and irrelevant
facts, for reasons which it is not my duty to
explain. The indictment states simply that
Mr. Finerty has published a false and scan-
dalous libel upon the lord lieutenant of Ire*
land, tending to bring his government into
disrepute, and to alienate the affections of the
people; and one would have expected, that,
witnout stating any other matter, the counsel
for the crown would have gone directly to the
proof of this allegation ; but he has not done
ao; he has gone to a most extraordinary
length indeed of preliminary observation, and
an allusion to facts, and sometimes an asser-
tion of facts, at which I own I was astonished,
•until I saw the drift of these allusions and as-
aertions. Whether you have been fairlv dealt
with by him, or are now honestly dealt with
bv me, you must be the judges. He has been
pleased to say, that this publication signed
** Jliarcifi" is only a part ot a system pursued
-by that paper— That " The Fre$s*' itself is to
,be considered as a mere secondary and instru-
mental part of an entire preconcerted system,
contrived for the purpose of exciting the peo-
ple to a resistance agunst their rulers ^tend-
ing to traduce the rulers of their country, and
^ cxciit an al^horreoce of the measures of go-

vernment, of the laws, and of the administra-
tion of j[ustice.

So widely has the cbaree been stated — ^I
feel mvsclt bewildered in the unexpected ex-
tent of it. But perhaps it is, notwithstanding,
too narrow in some points, though it is too ex-
tensive in others.

As to this I will only ask you whether .you
are fairly dealt with ? Whether it is fair treat-
ment to men upon their oaths, to insinuate to
them, that the general character of a news-
paper (and that general character founded
merely upon the assertion of the prosecutor),
is to have any influence upon their minds,
when they are to judge of a particular publi-
cation? I will only ask you, what men you
must be supposed to be, when it is thought
that even in a court of justice, and with the
eyes of the nation upon you, vou can be the
dupes of that trite and explodea expedient, so
scandalous of late in this country, of raising a
vulgar and mercenary crv against whatever
man, or whatever principle, it is thought ne-
cessary to put down ; and I shall thereA)re
merely leave it to your own pride to suggest
4]pon what foundation it could be hoped, that
a senseless clamour of this kind against a
series of newspapers with which the present
traverser may not have had the least con-
nexion, and not one of which is now pro-
duced beibre you, could be echoed back by
the yell of a jury upon their oatlis.— I trust,

gentlemen, you see that this has nothing to
o with the case now before you.
Again, let me ask you, what has this case
to do with the administration of justice — if by
that is meant the ^'m/icia/ ad mmist ration of
justice ? If this were a hbel upon the judicial
administration of justice, you would scarcely
find an advocate of twenty years standing at
the bar, so little improved by his experience
as to attempt to vindicate an attack upon the
judicial administration of justice.— Two highly
respected judges bore a part in the trial al-
luded to. There is not one word of reproach
upon either of Uiem, or their venerable and
respected characters. Then I say, in one
word, it is no hbcl upon the judicial adminis-
tration of justice.

But, gentlemen, I tell you what it is^It
is a charge upon his majesty's ministers, to
whom has been committed that most valuable
and important branch of the prerogative, that
of extending mercy to those to whom it oueht
to be extended. It is stated strongly in that
libel, if it be one, that that deoartment has
not been filled as it ought to be— that the
magistrate has not administered the sword
put into his hand, with mercy to the subiect.
That is the charge contained in this publica-
tion.—Gentlemen, the language of it has
been abused— Be pleased to consider you are
not trying the author, but the printer, who
did not write, and possibly could not write
the paper in question, but who seeing the
honest intention and fair spirit of its contents,
caused it to ht published. A printer may be

»7I1

38 GEORGE lU.

Trial ofPder Finer I y

[972

ftosweralJe for the 5ubstanco of what he
prints and publishes, but surely can never
oe held responsible for the language, or the
style.

Gentlemen of the jury, other matters have
been mentioned which I must repeat for the
same purpose, that of showing you that they
have nothing to do with the question. The
learned counsel has been pleased to say, that
be comes forward in this prosecution, as the
real advocate for the liberty of the press, and
he has laid down one position, with part of
which I agree, but in the extent of which I
do not coincide. He has been pleased to say,
that the constitution can never be lost, while
the freedom of the press remains, and that no-
thing can destroy the liberty of the press but its
own licentiousness ; as to that, he might as
well have told yoo, that there is only one mor-
tal disease of which a man can die ; and when
he comes forward to extinguish this paper in
the ruin of the printer by a state prosecution,
you must judge bow candidly he is treating

?rou, both in the fact and in the consequence ;
le reasons, as he must do, if he recommended
the putting a very dear friend to death as a

Sreventive against the single disease of which
e might otherwise chance to die.—- Gentle-
men, the press has died the death of tyranny
in every country of Europe save England — it
has perished under the sword of tyrants, and
why ? Because it is the shield of the people
against the power of such tyrants, and there-
fore it is the object of the enemy to disarm
the people of that shield which is to protect
tliem. And is it in Ireland that we are told
licentiousness is the only disease that can be
mortal to the press } Has he heard of no-
thing else that has been fatal to the freedom
of publication? I know not whether the
printer of the Northern Star may have heiurd
ef such things in his captivity; bat I know
that his wife and his children are weU ap-
f rized, that a press may be destroyed in tne
<i pen day, not ny its own licentiousness, but
by the licentiousness of a military foice.

Gentlemen, I know you should hold a sa>
iutary check over the licentiousness of the
press: it is necessary for its own sake; it is
necessary lest the innocent should suffer; lest
the public should lose a watchful centinel,
and lest the sword should be waved over the
subject in oppression or injustice. But when
you are guarding against its licentiousness,
neware how you do that which may silence
it altogether. Look to tliis paper, and let me
ask, <H)es it comport with the liberty of the
press, if a bad public measure be adopted, to
^tateto the people that it is a bad public mesh
sure ? Is it competent to the press, if a Wrong
thing be done, to say it has been done ?-^0t
is all question about truth or falsehood out of
the case altogether ? For there is not a word
stated in the paper, that is not avowed from
the bar.

If you «W5 not bold enough or wise enough ,
to consider thk liberty of tile preM, in tbe

>l

way I liave licen stating, that is, that it
should be competent to the press to animad-
vert fully and stronaly upon public measures,
I should be sorry for the act of parliament
which put you into a situation you had not
fortitude or integrity to fill — that those cases
were not still left to the cool dispassionate
mind of the judges, rather than to a bigotted
jury, lost and bewildered in the panic of the
times, and not able to find their integrity or
their understandings. You are inhabitants of
a suffering country ; let me exhort you, there-
fore, to protect the enjoyment of that liberty
of public thought and of public speech, witln
out which you are less than men; and to
guard it on the one hand from abuses that
must disgrace it^ and on the other from that
power ^m wluch you are its only natural
refuge.

You are told this prosecuUon b instituted
by the state in order to assert the liberty of
the press. Gentlemen, the position starts a
train of thought, of melancholy retrospect,
ancl direful prospect, to which I did not think
the learned counsel would have been very for-
ward to commit your minds. It leads you
naturally to reflect at what times, irom what
motives, and with what consequences the go-
vernment has displayed its patriotism by pro-*
secutions of thi9 sort? As to the motives;
does history give you a single instance in
which the state has been provoked to these
conflicts, except by the fear of truth, and by
the love of vengeance P Have you ever seen
the rulers of any country bring forward a pro-
secution from motives of filial piety, for libels
upon their departed ancestors ? Do you read
that Elizabeth directed any of those state pro-
secutions against the libels which the divines
of her times had written against her Catholic
sister, or against the other libels which the
same gentlemen had written against her Pro^
testant father ? No, gentlemen, we read of
no such thing ; but we know she did bring
forward a prosecution from motives of per-
sonid resentment ; and we know that a jury
was found time-serving, and mean enough, to
eive a verdict, which she was ashamed to carry
into effect. I said the learned counsel drew
you back to the times that have been marked
by these miserable conflicts. 1 see you turn
your thoughts to the reign of the second
James. I see you turn your eyes to those
paces of governmental abandonment^ of po-
pular degradation, of expiring liberty, of men-
ciless and sanguinary persecution; to that
miserable peric^, in which the fallen and ab-
ject state of man might have been almost att
argument in the mouth of the Atheist and the
blasphemer, asainst the existence of an All-
just and an All-wise First Cause; if the do-
rious era* of the Revolution that followed it,
had not refuted the impnus inference, by
showing that if man deffcends, it is not in his
own proper motion ; that it is with labour and
with pain, <«nd that he can continue to unk
only until, hy the force and pressure of th^

973J

for a Siditioui LibeL

A. D, 1797.

[974

descent, the spring of his immortal faculties
acquires that recuperative energy and effort
that hurries him as many miles aloft — he
sinks but to rise again. It is at such periods
as preceded the Revolution, that the state
seeks for shelter in the destruction of the
press; it is in a period like that, that the
tyrant prepares for an attack upon the peo*
pie, b]^ destroying the liberty of the press ;
n^ taking away that shield of wisdom and of
virtue, behind which the people are invulner-
able ; in whose pure and polished convex,
ere the lifted blow has fallen, he beholds his
own image, and is turned into stone. It is
at those periods that the honest man dares
T)ot speak, because truth is too dreadful to be
told ; it is then humanity has no ears, because
liberty has no tongue. It is then the preud
man scorns to speak, but like a physician
baffled by the wayward excesses of a dying
patient, retires indignantly from the bed off
an unhappy wretch, whose ear is too fasti-
dious to bear the sound of wholesome advice,
whose palate is too debauched to bear the
salutar^ bitter of the medicine that might re-
deem him ; and therefore leaves him to the
felonious piety of the slaves that talk to him
of hfe, and strip him before he is cold.

I do not care, gentlemen, to exhaust too
much of your attention, by following this
subject through the last century with much
minuteness ; but the facts are too recent in
your mind not to show you, that the Hber^ of
the press and the hberty of the people sink
and rise together; that the libertv of speaking
and the liMrty of acting have shared exactly
the same fate. You must have observed
in England that their fate Ims been the
same m the successive vicissitudes of their
late depression ; and sorry am I to add, that
this country has exhibited a melancholy
proof of their inseparable destiny, through the
various and farther stages of deterioration
down to the period of their final extinction ;
when the constitution has given place to the
sword, and the onlv printer in Ireland, who
dares to speak for the people, is now a prisoner
in the dock.

Gentlemen, the learned counsel has made
the real subject of this prosecution so small a
part of his statement, and has led you into so
wide a range, certainly as necessary to the
object as inapplicable to the subject of this
prosecution ; tnat I trust you will think me
excusable in having somewhat followed his
example. Glad am I to find that I have the
authority of the same example for coming at
last to what ought to be the only object oflhis
trial.

This, gentlemen, is a charge made, in very
strong language, against the lord lieutenant
of Ireland; he is charged with having grossly
and inhumanly denied the mercy of the crown,
where the writer alleges it ought to have
been extended. Mercy is one of the preroga-
tives of the crown — a, mat trust reposed in
the crown for the benent of the people; — it Is

committed to the wiMlom and discretion of
na^esty— a discretion to be exercised like thd
discretion of a court of justice in the spirit of
the law and the constitution, '< ducernere per
legem quid sUjusium;*' to decree according to
the laws of eternal justice; and where those
laws require an exercise of the trust, it is only
a discharge of the great duty which the king
owes the people ; for he is sworn to administer
justice in mercy.

The facts are not controverted. Il has
been asserted that their truth or falsehood is
indifferent, and they are shortly these, as they
appear in this publication. A person of the
name of William Orr was indicted for having
administered the oath of a United Irishman.
Everv man knows what that oath is ; that it is
simply an engagement, first, to promote a
brotherhood of affection among men of all
religious distinctions : secondly, to labour for
a parliamentary reform ; and thirdly, an obli-
gation of secrecy, which was added to it when
the convention law made it criminal and pu*
nishable to meet by any public delegation for
that purpose. After remaining upwards of a
year m gaol, Mr. Orr was brought to trial, was,
specially prosecuted b^r the crown, and sworn
asainst by a common informer of the name
of Wheatfy, who was the only witness.

Mr. Attorney General, — ^The fact is not so.

Mr. Curran, — I do recollect there was a
second witness, but bis testimony did not go
to the material parts of the case. Wbeatty,
the principal witness, had himself taken the
obligation, and upon his testimony, Mr. Orr
was" convicted under the Insurrection act,
which makes the administering such an obli-
gation a felony of death. The jury recom-
mended him to mercy; the judge, with the
humanity becoming his character, transmitted
the recommendation to the noble prosecutor
in this case. Two of the jurors made solemn
affidavit in court that liquor had been con-
veyed into their room; tnat they were bru«
tallv threatened by some of their fellow jurors
with capita] prosecution if they did sot finj
the prisoner guilty ; and that under the im-
pression of those threats, and worn down by
watching and intoxication, they had given a
verdict of guilt v against him, though they be-
lieved him in their conscience to be innocent.
It is also stated that further inquiries were
made, which ended in a discovery of the infa>-
mous life and character of the informer ; that
a respite was therefore sent once, and twice,
and thrice, to give time as Mr. Attorney-ge-
neral has stated, for his excellency to consider
whetlier mercy could be extended to him or
not ; and that with a knowledge of all these
circumstances, his excellency did finally: de-
termine that mercy should not be extended
to him, and that he was accordingly executed
upon that verdict. Of this publication, which
the indictment charges to be false and sediti-
ous, Mr. Attom^-general is pleased to say,
that the design of"^ it is to bring the courts of
justice into contempt. As . |o tliis point of
fact, gentlemen, I beg to set you right.

973] - 38 GEORGE III.

To tho admiDistration of justice, so far as it
relates to the judges, this publication has not
even an allusion in any part mentioned in this
indictment ; it relates to a department of jus-
tice, that cannot begin until the duty of the
judge closes. Sorry should I be, that with
respect to this unfortunate man any censure
should be flung on those judges who presided
at this trial, with the mildness and temper
that became them, upon so awful an occasion
as the trial of life ana death. Sure am I,that
if they had been charged with inhumanity or
injustice, and if they had condescended at all
to prosecute the reviler, they would not have
come forward in the face of the public to say,
as has been said this day, that it was immate-
rial whether the charge was true or not. Sure
1 am, their first object would have been to
show that it was laise, and readily should I
have been an eye-witness of the fact, to hai'e.
<*ischarged the debt of ancient friendshi|i, of
private respect, and of public duty, and upon
my oath to have repelled the falsehooa of
such an imputation. Upon this subject, gen-
tlemen, the presence of those venerable judges
restrains what I might otherwise have said,
nor should I have named them at all if I had
not been forced to do so, and merely to unde-
ceive you if you have been made to believe
their characters to have anv community
of cause whatever with the lord lieutenant of
Ireland. To him alone the charge is confined,
and against him it is made, as strongly, I
suppose, as the writer could find words to ex-
press it. It is alleged that the vicevoy of Ire-
land has cruelly abused the prerogative of
royal mercy, in sufierine a man under such
circumstances to perish Tike a common male*
factor. For this Mr. Attorney-general calls
for your conviction as a false and scandalous
libel, and after stating himself every fact that
I have repeated to you, either from his state-
ment, or from the evidence, he tells you that
you ouffht to find it false and scandalous,
though be almost in words admits it is not
false, and has resisted the admission of the
evidence by which we offered to prove every
word of it to be true.

Gentlemen, there is no evidence laid before
you, to contradict the charge, and therefore
I am at liberty to take it up in this way, that
the writer thought himself warrantable in as-
serting what he did. Therefore the case comes
to this : here wiis a verdict blackened by the
disavowal of two of the persons who found it ;
the jury recommend; the witness is impeached
— ^and after all, the convict is led out to a
public execution. That is the fact and ground
upon which the writer charges the person in
whom the executive power isvestecl, with not
having performed his duty as he oueht.

Oentlemeo, I protest to God, f scarcely
know how to speak upon this subject. Was
it cruel to execute the man ? That is not the
question. The question is not, whether such
strong; expressions ought to be used; but the
question is, are you warranttd in calling the

Trial of Pder JineHjf

[976

paper a fal!«, scandalous, and seditious libel,
if the writer, under the impressions I have
mentioned, thought himself authorized in
point of fact in stating it ?

And here, gentlemen, give me leave to re-
mind you of the parties b^ore you. The tra-
verser is a printer, who follows that profession
for bread, and who at a time of great public
misery anil terror, when the people are re-
strained by law firom debating under any dele-
gated form ; when the few constituents that
we have are prevented by force from meeting
in their own persons to deliberate, or to pe-
tition ; when every other newspaper in Ireland
is put down by force, or purchased by the ad-
ministration (though here, gentlemen, per*
haps. I ought to bee your pardon for stating
without authority ; I recollect, when we at-
tempted to examine as to the number of news-
papers in the pay of the Castle, that the evi-
dence was ol^ected to) ; at a season like this,
Mr. Finerty has had the courage, perhaps the
folly, to print the publication in question,
from no motive under Heaven of malice, or of
vengeance, but in the mere duty which he
owes to his family and to the public.

His prosecutor is the king*s minister in Ire.
land ; in that character does the learned gen-,
tleman mean to say, that his conduct is not a
fair subject of public observation ? What is
the liberty of the press } If government do
improper things, is the great inquisitor of the
prtts to remain gagged and blind ? Let me
not be understood as uttering any sentiment
of my own as upon any authority of my own.
In this place I feel I have no right to do so.
The subject matter and the observations na-
turally arising therefrom form the full extent
of my duty and situation. Do you think that
the fact charged was a cruel and sanguinary
exercise of the delegated power of mercy .' If
it was, do you think it criminal in any man
to say to the public, that he thought so ? Or
is the ver^ excess of the atrocity to give the
silence of'^the grave to the transaction ? Are
you to confine the press to the mere suburbs
of authority, and not suffer it to approach
that citadel where power and where abuse so
of\en dwell together ? Where does the learned
counsel find his authority for that in the law^
or the practice of the sister country ? Have
the virtues or the exalted station, or the ge-
neral love of his people preserved the sacred
person, even of the royal master of the prose-
cutor from the asperity and the intemperance
of public censure, unfounded as it ever must
be, with any personal respect to his majesty, in
justice or truth } Have the gigantic abihties
of Mr. Pitt — have the more gigantic talents of
his mat antagonist Mr. Fox, protected cither
of them from the insolent familiarity, and for
aught I know, the injustice with which wri-
ters have treated them? What latitude of
invective has the king's minister escaped upon
the subject of the present unhappy war? Is
there an epithet of contumely, or of reproach^
that hatred, or that fkncy eould suggest thai

977]

fir a Sedilious Libel*

if not publicly lavished' upbn them. Do jou
not find the n^ordB, advocate of despotism,
tobbef of the public treasure, mtirderctof th6
king's 8!tbjects» debaucher of the public mo-
rality, deg^der of the constitution, tarhisher
of the British glory, destroyer of Ihe British
empire, by frequency of use, lose all meaning
vrhatsoever, and dwindle into terms, not of
ftny peculiar reproach, but of mere ordinary
appellation f And why, gentlemen, is this
permitted in that country f Til tell you why;
(because in that country, they arc* yet wise
tenoueh to see, that the measures of the state
are the proper subjects for the freedom of the
press : that the principles relating to personal
slander do not apply to rulers, or to ministers ;
thai to punish an attack upon a public mi-
tiister/ without any regard to truth, but merely
because of its tendency to a breach of the
peace, would be ridiculous in the extreme.
What breach of tlie peace, I pray you, is likely
to happen in such a case 7 Is it the tendency
of such publications to provoke' Mr. Pitt or
Mr. Dundas to break the head of the writer,
if they should happen to meet him ? No,
gentlemen, in that country this freedom is
exercised, because the people feel it to be their
light ; and it is wisely suffered to pass by the
atate, kom a consciousness, that it would be
vatn to oppose it ; a consciousness confirmed
bythe event of every incautious experiment
It is' sufiered to pass, from a conviction, that,
in a court of justice at least, the bulwarks of
the constitution will not be tamely surreudered
10 the state, and that the intended victim,
whether clothed in the humble guise of ho-
nest industry, or decked in the honours of
Smius and virtue and philosophy : whether a
ardy, or a Tooke, will find certain protection
ID the honesty and spirit of an English jury.

But, gentlemen, I suppose "Mr. Attorney-
general will scarcely wish to carry his doctrine
altogether so far. Indeed, I remember, he
declared himself a most zealous advocate for
the liberty of the press. I may, therefore^
6ven according to him, presume to make some
observations on the conducrof the existing
government. I should wish to know how far
the attorney general supposes it to extend?
Is it to the composition of lampoons and ma-
drisals, to be sung down the grates by rasged
bansd-mongers, to kitchen-maids and ^t-
itien ? I wul not suppose, that he means to
confine it to those ebulKtions of Billings^te;
to those cataracts of ribaldry and scumllity
that are daily spouting upon the miseries of
our wretched fellow sufierers, and the un-
availing efforts of those who have laboured m
their cause. Does he say, that t he press must '
be the repository for adulation upon the go-
vernment, and calumny upon tne people?
Does he say, that the press shdll only supply
a salvefor those spots and pimples which ap-
pea^upon the surface, but must not dare to
explore the recesses of the heart to which that
deieterioos poison has penetrated of which the
effects are death ? I will not suppose that he

VOL XX^•L

A; b. 1T97. [979

confines it to the poetic licence of a birth day
ode, of a, lampoon upon ihe people ; in wliic h
case I shoilld entirely agree xf'uh him, th.it
the truth or the* falsehood is as perlectly im-
material to thb law, as it is to the laufeat; as
perfectly unrestrained by the law of' the
land as 'it is by any law of decency or
shame, of modesty or decorum. But us to
the privilege of censure or bianie, I am sorry
that the learned genllcman' has not favoured
you with his notion oY the liberty of the press.
Suppose an Irish viceroy acts a very little ab-
surdly; may the press venture to be a Ifttie
respectfully comical upon that absurdity ?
The learned counsel does not, at least in
terms, give a negative to that. But Jet me
treat you honestly, and go farther to a more .
material point. Suppose an Irish viceroy does
an act that brings scandal upon his master ;
that fills the mind of a reasonable man with
the fear of approachins despotism, that leaves
ho hope to the people of preserving themselves
and their children from chains but in common
confederacy for common safety. What is an .
honest man in that case to do? I am sorry
the right honourable advocate far the liberty of
the prest hu not told you liis opinion, at least
in any express words^ I will, therefore, neh-
ture to give you my far humbler thought upon
the subject. I thmk an honest man ought
to tell the people frar.kly and boldly of their

Keril ; and I must say 1 can imagine no vil-
Liny greater than that of his holding a trai-
torous silence at such a crisis, except the vil-
lainy and baseness of prosecuting him, or of
finding him guilty for such an honest discharge
of his public duty. Is he to suffer the sword
to fill upon the heads of his fiellow citizens
without giving them notice of the danger • and ,
is he to be punished for that conduct by which
their lives may have been saved ? No,' gen- *
tlemen, that is not the doctrine of our law or
our constitution. And I found myself upon
the known principle of the Revolution of Eng-
land, namely, that the crown itself may he
abdicated by certain abuses of the thist re-
posed,* and that there are possible excesses of
arbitrary power, which it is not only the right,
biit the boundcn duty of every honest man t j
resist at the risk of his fortune and his life.'—
Now, gentlemen, if this reasoning be ad-
mittedy and it cannot be denied, if there be
any possible event in which the people are
obliged to look only to themselves, and are
justified in doing so — can you be so absurd as
to say, 'that it is lawful fur the people to act
upon it, when it unfortunately does arrive,
but that it is criminal in any man to tell them
that tbe'misemble event has actually arrived, '
o^ is imoiinently approaching? Far am 1,
gentlemen, from insinuating, that (extreme
as it is) our misery has been matured into any
deploi^able crisis of this kiiid; from which f
pray, that the Almighty God may for ever
preserve usi But Dim putting my principle
uipon the strongest ground, and most favour-
able to my opponents, namely, that it never *
3 R

979] 98 6K0RGE I^.

Mn be criminal to taj any Ihine of the
goYernment but what is Mie, and f put \iis
in the extreme, in order to demonstrate to you
ifortiori, tbatthe privileee of speaking truth
to the people, which holds in the last cxtre-^
nity, must also obtain in every stage of infe-
rior importance; and that however a court
may have decided before the late act, that the
truth was immaterial in a case of libel^ since
that act no honest jury can be governed by
such a principle.

Be pleased now, gentlemen, to consider the
grounds upon which this publication is called
a libel, and criminal. Mr. Attorney-eeneral
tells you it tends to excite sedition and tnsur*
rection. Let me again remind vou, that the
truth of this charge is not denied by the noble
prosecutor. What is it then^ that tends to
excite sedition and insurrection ? <* The act
that is charged upon the prosecutor, and is not
attempted to be denied." And, gracious God !
gentlemen of the jury, is the puhlic statement
of the king's representative this ? "I have
done a deed that must fill the mind of every
feeling or thinking man with horror and in-
dignation, that must alienate every man that
knows it from the king's eovernment^ and en»
danger the separation of this distracted em-
pire; the traverser has "had the guilt of pub*
lishing this fact, which I myself acknowledge,
and I pray you to find him guilty." Is ton
the case which the lord lieutenant of Irel|^)d
brin^ forward? Is this the principle for
which he ventures, at a dreadful crisis like
the present, to contend in a court of justice ?
Is this the picture which he wishes to hold
out of himself to the iustice and humanity of
his own countrymen f Is this the history
which he wishes to be read by the poor Irish-
man of the South and of the North, by the
sisler nation and the common enemy ?
No, gentlemen, he cannot hold that Ian-
— ^ with the profoundest respect, let me
o you by your verdict) defend his ex-
cellency, even against his own opinion and
his own reasoning. It is said, this paper
tends to sedition and insurrection— upon wnat
ground can such an idea be supported? — ^after
the multitudes who have perished in this un»
happv land within the last three years, and
vhich unhappiness has been borne with a
patience unparalleled in the history of nations,
can any man suppose that the fate of a single
individual could lead to resistance or insurrec-
tion ?— But suppose that it might, what ought
to be the conduct of an honest man at such a
season? should it not be to apprize thego-
vdrnment and the country of the approachmg
danger?— should it not be to say to tne viceroy,
you will drive the people to madness if you
persevere In such bloody councils ; you will
alienate the Irish nation ; you will distract
thfs common force ; vou will invite the com-
mon enemy. Should not an honest man say
to., the people—" the measure of your afflic-
tion is great, but you need not resort for
icmcdy to any despcrau apedients-->If the

J^rial ^p€Ur Finfrlg

[960

(and d(

king'a mioister is defective in hnmanijtr or
wisdom, bjs royal master and your ^lov^ so-
vereign is abounding in both;'* at such ^
moment can you be so senseless as not to
feel, that any one of you ought to hold such
language ?— or is it possible you could bq 9a
infatuated as to punish the roan who waa
honest enoueh to hold it?T-or is it possible
that you could bring yourselves to say to. your
country when the measuijes of government
are nreenant with danger and impending
miscniet— that at such a season, the press
ought to sleep upon its post, or sound nothing
but adulation and praise, acting like the per-
fidious watchman on his round, who sees thf
robber wrenching the bolts, or the flames
bursting from the windows^ while the inha^
bitant is wrapt in s1ee(K ana cries out, ** Thai
the morning is fair, ana all is well.''

If such be your notions of the duty of the
press, give in your verdictp^-a verdict ^hich
tells the people, (hey haVe not leave to speak
— where a contrary verdict given with bold*
ness, might save the lives of uncombed thou-
sands.—Proclaiim to Europe, that upon a sub-
ject like this, in a contest between ipercy and
a want of mercy and the sufferings of the
people, you have shrunk from your duty.
Compare your conduct with thatpf th« juriea
ifi £na;land and see how you will staijd the
examination — see whether you do an hoaest
or a worthv aict, by puttins down the onljr
paper^whicn exists in Ireland, and by dos^
£br ever all discussion upon public meaaurea;
gentlemen, you ought to consider, that maxi
IS subject to a number of restless passions.
What IS the state of this country ? Agitated
from one end to the other iqwn mat national
points, whether right or wrong f will not now
enquire, but do you sav, they shall not be
spoken of P In England, you see the utmost
extravagance of licentiousness ipdu%eds
Here the representative of the crown aajrSp
that mercer shall not be dispensed, and will
you proclaim, that no man shall say it ought ?
what is the consequence P That you suffer,
those contending passions to burn with uik
governable fury, and refuse to the public heat
even the chance of being cooled or ventilated
by the uiiohstructed course of public sentim^t
and public discussion.

On this part of the case I shall only pot oMi
q^uestion to you. 1 do not affect to say it ia
similar in all its points ; I do not affect to
compare theliumble fortunes of Mi*. Orr with
the sainted names of Russel or Sydney ; atill
less am I willing to find any likeness between
the present period and the year 1683. Bat I
will put a question to you, completely parallel
in Drinciple. When the unhappy and mia-
guiaed monarch of that day had shed the
sacred blood, which their noble heaxta bad
matured Into a fit cement of revoUidDD, if any
honest Englishman had been broiight to trial
for daring to proclaim to the world fata ab-
horrence of sucn a deed, what wouUl.yQ>^ hava
thought of the English jury that fBOutdhava

9B1]

Jbr M SmUtUm UM.

A. D. 179T.

[9M

•ud» ^f»* ksowitt our bctrts tbat what ht
'Mid, WM trot and hooost ' but we wtli tat
upon our oaths, that it was falae and criminal,
and we will by that base subserviency add
another item to the catalogue of public wrongs,
and another argument for the necessity of an
appeal to heaven for redress P

Gentlemen, I am perfectly aware that what
I say may be easily misconstrued, but if you
listen to me with the same fairness that I ad-
dress you, I cannot be misunderstood. When
I show ybu the full extent of your politiod
rights and remedies; when I answer those
slanderers of British liberty, who degrade the
monarch into a despot, and the subject into a
sllivto ; who peHrert the steadfiistness of law
into the waywardness of will ; when I show
you the inestimable stores of political wealth
80 dearly acquired bv our ancestors, and so
solemnly beoueathed ; and when I show you
how much or that pitdous inheritance has vet
survived all the prodigality of their posterny.
I am &r from saying that I stand in need ofit
aU upon the present occasion. No, gentlemen,
fiv am I indeed from such a sentiment.
No man more deeply than mvself deplores
the present melancholy state of our unhappy
countiy. Neither does any man moreter>
"vtatly wish for the return of peace and tran-
quiliitv, through the natural channels of mer-
-cy and of justice. I hav^ seen too much of
force and of violence to hope much good from
the continuance of them on one side, or reta-
liation from another. I have of late seen top
much of political rebuilding, not to have ob-
served that to demolish is not the shortest
way to repair. It is with pain and anguish
that I should search for the miserable right
of breaking ancient ties, or eoing in quest of
new relations, or untried adventures. No,
gentlemen, the case of my client rests not
upon these sad privileges of despur. I trust
that as to the fact, namely, Uie intention of
exciting insunection, you must see it cannot
he fooml in this publication ; that it is the
mere idle, unsupported imputation of malice,
or panic, or falsehood. And that as to tlie
law, so far has he been from transsressing
the limits of the constitution, that whole re-

g'ons lie between him and those limits which
s has not trod ; and which I pray to heaven
it may never he necessary for any of us to
tread.

Oentlemen, Mr. Attorney General has been
pleased to open another battery upon this
publication, which I do trust I shall silence,
unless I ffatter myself too much in supposing
that lutherto mv resistance has not been ut-
terly unsuocessnil. He abuses it for the (bul
and insolent familiarily of its address. I do
clesirly understand his idea'; he considers the
freedom of the press to be the license of offer-
ing that paltry adulation which no man ought
to stoop to utter or to hear; he supposes the
freedom of the press ought to be like the
freedoujf of a king's Jester,^ who instead ofre-
Irativingthe fauhsof ^ichmajes^onghttohe

ashamed, it base and cunoing sweugh, under
the mask of servile and adulatory censure, to
stroke down and pamper those vices of which
it is foolish enough to be vain. He would not
have the press presume to tell the viceroy,
that the prerogative of mercy is a trust for the
benefit of the subject, and not a gaud v feather
stuck into the diadem to shake in the wind,
and by the waving of the gorgeous plumaee
to amuse the vanity of the wearer. He would
not have it to say to him that the discretion
of the crown as to mercy is like the discretion
of a court of justice as to law, and that in the
one case as well as the other, wherever the
propriety of the exercise of it appears, it is
equally a matter of right. He would have the
press all fierceness to the people, and all sy-
cophancy to power ; he would have it consi-
der the mad and phrenetic depopulations of
authority like the awful and inscrutable dis-
pensations of Providence, and saylto llie un-
feeling and despotic spoiler in the blasphemed
and insulted language of religious resignation
— ^ the Lord hath given, and the Lord hath
taken away, bfessed be the name of the
Lord ! ! f" But let me condense the generality
of the learned gentleman's invective into ques-
tions that you can conceive. Does he mean
that the air of this publication is rustic and
uncourtly ? Does ne mean to say, that be-
cause the Poet Laureate might not approve
the expression, vou are to find the traverser
guilty r Does he mean, that when Marcus
presumed to ascend the steps of the castle^
and to address the viceroy, be did not turn
out his toes as he ought to have done ? But^
gentlemen, you are not a jury of dancing-
masters : — or does the learned gentleman
mean that the language is coarse iM vulgar T
If this be his comnlamt, my client has but-tf
poor advocate. I do not pretend to be a
mighty grammarian or a formidable critic;
it may be said, perhaps with truth, that the
language is in some places disresoectful-^but,
gentlemen^ I look not to the garo — I look to
the man ; and if I find humanity in the lowest
station, pining over sufiTerinzs and breaking
into indignation at the fate ofothers— if I see,
even ragged poverty " grumbling pity" at ca-
lamity;— I love such feelings, I love such
men, and

** I could hug the greasy rogues they please^

me.

But, gentlemen, you are not called upon as
grammarians or critics. You are called upon
to protect the government against insurrec-
tion, not censure, and in the discharge of that
dut^, I would bes leave to suggest to you in
serious humility, tnat a free press can be sup-
ported only by the ardour of men who feel the
promptinjg sting of real or supposed capacity,
who write from the enthusiasm of vjrtue, or
the ambition of praise, and over whonii if you
exercise the rigour pf grammatical censorslVip,
you will inspire theih with as mean an opimoa
of your integrity as of your wisdom, ai^d inevi-

983] SS6]^0R6£..III.

tably drive them from their post ^ and if jrou .
do so, re]y upon it, you will reduce the spirit
df publication, and with it, the press of this
country, to what it fur a long interval has
been, the register of births, and fairs, and fu-
nerals, and the general abuse of tlie people
and their friends.

Bui, gentlemen, in order to bring this
charge of insolence and vulgarity to the test,
give me leave to ask you, whether you know
of any language which could have adeauatel^
described the idea of mercy denied where it
ought to have been granted — or of any phrase
vigorous enough to convey the inm^nation
which an honest man would have felt upon
such a subject? Let me beg of you for a
moment to suppose, that any one of you bad
been the writer of this very severe expqstula,-
tion witli the viceroy, and that you had been
the witness of the whole progress of this never
to be forgotten catastrophe — Let me suppose
that you had known the charge upon which
Mr. Orr was apprehended, the charge of ab-
juring that bigotry, which had torn and dis-
graced his country, of pledging himself to re-
store the people to their place in the consti-
tution, and of binding himself never tube the
betrayer of his fellow labourers in that enterr
prize, that you had seen him upon that charge
removed from his industry, and confined in a
gaol, that through the slow and lingering
progress of twelve tedious months you had
seen hitn confined in a dungeon, shut out
from the common use of air and of bis own
limbs, that day after day you had marked the
unhappy captive, cheered by no sound, but
the cries of hb family, or the clanking of his
chains, that you had seen him at last brought
to his trial, that you had seen the vile and
perjured informer deposing against his life,
that .you had seen the drunken, and worn out
anfl terrified jury give in a veraict of death ;
that you bad seen the same jury, when their
returning sobriety had brought back their
reason, prostrate themselves before the huma-
nity of the Bench, and pray that the mer^ of
the crown might save their characters from
the reproach of an involuntary crime, their
consciences from the torture of eternal self
condemnation, and their sQuls from the inde-
lible stain of innocent blood.— Let me suppose,
that you had seen the respite given, and that
contrite and honest recommendation trans-
mitted to that seat, where merty was pre-
sumed to dwell, that new and unheard^f
crimes are discovered against the informer,
that the royal mercy seems to relent, and that
a new respite is sent to the prisoner, that time
is taken, as the learned counsel for the crown
lite expressed it, to see. whether mercy (^uld
be extended, or not ; that a<\er that neriod of
lingering deliberation passed, a thira respite
is transmitted, that the unhappy captive ^hlm-,
self feels the' cheering hope of being restored
to a family that he had aaored, to a character'
that he had never stained, and to a country
tbat lie had ever loved ; that you had seen hb

Trial ^ Piter Bnerii/ ' [^8*

wife and his cbiMrtn jupon lliair i^me^j fp^iRg
those tears to gratituoe, which their 'lockivt
and frozen hearts could. not eive tp apguii^
and despair, and, impbring tne blessings of
Eternal Providence upon his head, who bad
graciously spared the father, and restored him
to his children. ,

** Alas, nOr wife, nor children more shall he

behold, - '

*• Nor friends, nor sacred home !'*

Often did the weary dove return .to the
window of his.a^k, but the olive leaf was to
him no sign that the waters had subsided.
No seraph mercy unbars his dungeon, aojd
leads him forth to light and life; .but tbe
minister of death burnes him to the scene of
suffering and of shaine; where, unmoved by
the hostile array of artillery and armed men,
collected toffether, to secure^ or to insult, or
to disturb biro, he dies with a solemn de-
claration of hb innocence, and utters his
last breath in a prayer for the liberty of his
country.

Let me now ask you, if any of you fa^ |u]-
dressed the public; ear upon 'so toiA /^nd
monstrous a subject, in what language would
you have conveyed the fillings of horror and
indignation? Would you have stooped tp
the meanness of nualified complaint ? Would
you have chcckea your feelings to search for
courtly and gaudy language? Would you
bave been mean ienough — ^but I entreat your
forgiveness, I have already told.you I ^o not
think meanly of you; had I thought so ^nieanly
of you, I could not suffer my mind to com-
mune with yuu as it has done ; had I tliei^ht
vou that base and vile instrument, attuned by
hope and fear into discord and fabehood, from
whose vulgar string no groan of suffering
could vibrate, no voice. of integrity or honour
could speak, let me honestly tell you, I should
have scorned to fling my hand across it, I
should have left it to a ntter minstrel. If,
therefore, I do not grossly err in my opinion
of you, I could invent no language upon^uch
a subject as Uib, that must not lag behindl
the rapidity of. your feelings, and that would
not disgrace those feelings, if it attempted to
describe them.

Gentlemen, I am not unconscious that the
learned counsel for the crown seemed Jpacl-
dress you with a confidence of a very different
kind; he seemed to expect from you a kiiid
and respectful sympathy with the ^feelings of
the Castle, and the griels of chided authonty ;
perhaps, gentlemen, he may know you better
than I do ; if be does, he has spoken to you as
be ought; he has been right in telling you,
th^t if the reprobation of this writer isweak^
it b' because his genius could not pake it
stronger ; he has neen right in teljing. voii,
ibat his. language has not heen braideojuni.
festooneid as.ele^ntly as it might ^tb&t, he has'
not pinched the mberable plaits ofbis pbnse*

old
wU

l6ay/. nor placed his patches a^d ieajdma
Iflr that correcliito of. ipilluiery,' vbicii

D831

Jot a SedHioui LAgU

A. D. 1797.

1:986

became to cfauibed apcraoo. If you agi^ f Isodcncy or not. Itis nowiieceMarj that I

with hiro^ gentlemen oft he jury, if you think 1 should explain it to you more at large.

that the roan, who ventures at the hazard of Tou cannot be ignorant of the great con-

hia own lite to rescue from the deep the
drowned honour of his country, must nut
presume upon the guilty familiarity of pluck-
ing it up by the Iocks, 1 have no more to say :
do a courteous thing, upright and h<mest
jurors ! Sworn intef^rity of your country !
iind a civil and obirging verdict agaiust the
printer ! And when you have done so, march
through the ranks of your fellow citizens to
your own bonies, and bear their looks as you
pass along; retire to the bosom of your &mi*
lies and your children* and when yon are pre-
siding over the morality of the parental board,
tell those infants, who are to be the future
men of Ireland, the history of this day. Form
their young minds by your precepts, and con-
firni tliose nrecepts by your own esample^
teach, them riow cliscreetly allegiance may be
perjured on the table, or loyalty be Ibrsword
in the jury box; and when you have done so^
tell them the story of Orr; — tell them of his
capUvjty, of his children, of his crime, of 'his
hopes, of his disappointments, of his courage
and of his death ; and when you find you^
little hearers hanging from your lips, when
you see their eyes overflow with sympathy
and sorrow, and their youns hearts bursting
with the pangs of anticipated orphanage, ten
them, that you had the boldness and the
Justice to stigmatize the monster-— who had
dared to publish the transaction !

Gentlemen, I believe I told you befdre,
that the conduct of the vice*roy forms but a
small part indeed of the subject of this trial.
If the vindication of his mere personal ch»*
racter had been, as it ought to have been, the
sole object of this prosecution, I should liave
fell the most respectful rcjgret at seeing a
person of his high consideration come forward
lu a court of public justice, in one and the
same breath toatlmittlie truth, and to demand
the punishment of a publication like the pre-
sent, to prevent the chance he mieht have
had of such an accusation being disbelieved,
and by a prosecution like this to give to the
nas^tog stricture of a newspaper, that life and
body and action and reality that proves it to
all mankind, and makes the record of it
indelible. Even as it is, I do own I feel the
utmost concern, that his name should have
been soiled by being mixed in a question of
which it is the mere pretext and scape goat
Mr. Attorney General was too wise to state
to you the real question, or the object which
be wished to be answered by your verdict
Do you remember, that he. was pleased to
say, that this publication was a base and foul
9iisrepresentation of the viitue and wisdom
of the government, and a false and audacious
statement to the world thatt:he'king*s govern-
ment in Ireland was base enough to pay in-
ibmijers -for taking awav the lives ot the
pc4>ple? When I hearcf this statement to-
day, I doubted whether you were awaic of its

diet between prerogative and privilege which
hath convulsed the coimtry for the last 6fteerl
years; when I say privilege, you canaot sup-
pose that I mean the privilege of the House
of Commons, I mean the privileges of the
people. You are no strangers to the various
mooes by which the people laboured to apt*
proach their object. Delegations, conven-
tions, remonstrances, resolutions, petitions to
the parliament; petitions to the thtoae. It
might not be decorous in this place to stait^
io you with any acrimony, the various modee
of resistance that were employed on the other
aide ; but you all of you seem old enough ta
)*emerober the variety of acts of parliament
that liave been made, by which the people
were deprived, session at^er session, of what
they ban supposed tobe the known and es-
tablished fundamental rights of the consti-
(tition ; the right of public debate, the .right
of public petition, the right of bail, the right
of trial, the right of arms for self-defence ;
until the last, even the relics of popular privi-
lege became superseded by a military force;
the press was extinguished; and the state
found its last entrencnment < in> the grave of
the constitution. As little can you to 8tr&n«
eers to the tremendous confederations of
hundreds of thousands of our countrymen, of
the nature and the objects of which such a
variety of opinions have been propagated and
entertauied.

' Tlie writer of this letter had presumed to
censure the reckll of lordFitzwilliain, as well
as tbe measures of the present viceroy. • Into
this: subject r do not enter; but you cannot
yourselves forget that theconciliatory measures
of the . former noble lord had produced an
almost miraculous unanimity in this country;
and much do I regret, and sure I am that 'it
is. not without pain you can reflect, how un-
Ibrtunately the conduct of his successor has
terminated. His intentions might have been
tbe best 1 1 neither know them nor condemn
them, but to their terrible eflbcts you cannot
be b lind . Every new act of coercion has been
followed by some new symptoms of discon-
tent, and every new attack provoked some
new paroxysm of resentment or some new
combination of resistance. In this deplorable
state of affiiirs, convulsed and distracted with-
in, and menaced by a most formidable enemy
(irom without, it was thought that public
safely might be found in union and concilia-
tion,*and repeated applications were made to
the parliament of this kingdom for a calm
inquiry into the complaints of the • people ;
these applications were made in vain. Im-
pressed by the same motives,- Mr. Fox*
brought the same subject befbre the Commons
of England, and ventured to ascribe the pe-
rilous state of Ireland to the severity of its
^—11 .11 .1 ,■■■■-.—

• See the New Pari. Hist. vol. 83, p. 140.

987]

S8 G&ORGB m.

TrUtofP^gr Finerly

I96S

goreinincBt. Evcv bis Aupandotn abilUiei,
excited by tbo liveliest tympathy witb our
sufieriogs, and aoimated by ine most ardent
real to restore the strength with the uoion of
the empire, were repeatedly exerted without
success. The fact of disconteot was denied;
the fact of coercion was denied; and the
consequence was, the coercion became more
implacable, and the discontent more threat-
ening and irrecondleablc. A similar appli-
cation was made in the beginning of this
session in the Lords of Great Britain by our
illustrious countrvman,* of whom I do not
wonder that my learned friend should have
obsenredy how much vi^ie can fling pedigree
Into the shade; or how much the transient
honour of a body inherited from man,' is ob»
icured by the lustre of an intellect derived
from God. He, aibr being an eye- witness
of this countrv, presented Uie miserable pic-
ture of what he had seen ; and to the asto-
nishment of every man in Ireland, the exist*-
ence of those filets was ventured to be denied ;
the conduct of the present viceroy was justi-
fied and applauded; and the necessity of
continuing that conduct was insisted upon, as
the only means of preserving theconstiuition,
the peace, and the prosperity of Ireland. The
moment the learned counsel had talked of
this publication as a false statement of the
conduct of the government, and the conditioo
of the people, no roan could be at a loss to
see that the awful ouestion, which had been
dismisfeed from the Commons of Ireland, and
from the Lords and Commons of Great Bri-
tain, is now brought forwiud to be tried by a
side wind, and in a collateral way, t^ a cri-
paioal .prosecution. Let me ask you then,
are you prepared to say upon your oath, that
tho8« measures of coercion, which are dbuly
practised, are absolutely necessary, and ought
to be continued ? It is not upon Finerty you
•re sitting in judgment; but you are sitdns;
in judgment upon the lives and liberties or
the inhabitants of more than half of Ire*
land. You are to say, that it b a (bul pro^
ceeding to condemn the government of Ire-
land ; that it is a foul aSt, founded in foul
motives, and originating in falsehood and
sedition ; that it is aa attack upon a govern-
ment under which the people are prosperous
and happy ; that justice is administered with,
mercy; that the statements made in Great
Britain are false ; are the effiuions of party
or of discontent ; that all is mildness and
tranquilKtjr ; that there are no burnings, no
transportations ; that you never travel by the
light of ooBdamtions ; that the gaols are not
crowded month after month, from which pri-
soners are Uken out not for trial, but for em-
barkation!-7 These are the questions upoil
which I ss(y, you must virtually deekie. It is
in vain, that the oouusel for the crov^ may*
—^ — ■ 1

* The Earl of Moiiia, afterwards Marquis
of Hastings. See the New hul. Hist vol. 9^
p. 1066,

tell you I am misrepresenting the ease; thai
I am endeavouring to raise islt« fears, and
to take advantaj^ of your passions; that the
question is,.whetber this paper be a libel or not,
and that the circumstances of the country have
not5ing to do with it 8ach assertions must
be vain : the statement of the counsel for the
crown has forced the introduction of those
important topics, and I appeal to your own
hearts, whether the country is misrepresented,
and whether the government is misrepre-
sented.

I tell you therefore, gentlemen of the jury,
it is not with respect to Mr. Orr or Mr. Fincrtj
that vour vevdict is now sought; you are
called upon, on ^our oaths to say, that tlie
government is «vise and merciful ; that the

I leople. are prosperous and happy; that mi-
itary law ought to be continued ; that the
ponstttntion cotdd not with safety be restored
to Ireland ; and that the statements of a con^
trary import, by your advocates in either
country were libellous and false. I tell yoti
these are the questbns, and I ask you, can
you have the front to give the expected an-
swer in the face of a commimtty who know
the country as well as you do ? Let me ask you
how you could reconcile with such a verdict the
gaols, the tenders, the gibbets, the conflagra-
tions, the murders, the proclamations that we
hear of every day in the streets, and see every
day in the eoiiutry. What arethe processions of
the learned counsel himself circuitafter circuit ?.
Merciful God,! whatn the state of Ireland^
and where shall you find the wretched inha-
bitant of this land ^ You may find him per-
haps in a gaol, the only place of security, I
had almost sakl of ordinary habitation ! If
vou do not imd him there, you may see him
flying with his fiunily from the flames of bis
own dwelling; lighted to his dimgeou by the
oonflagratbn of his hoveL Or yon may find
his bones bleaching on the green fields of his
country; or he maybe found tossing upon
the surface of the ocean, and mingling his
mans with those tempests, less savage than
nis persecutors, that drift him to a return lesa
distance from his family and his home, with-
out charge, or trial, or sentence ! Is this a
foul misrepresentation? Or can you, With
these fiicts ringing in your ears and staring
you in the iace, say upon your oaths they ^
not exist P You are called upon in defiance
of shame, of truth or honour, to deny the suf-
ferings under which you groan, and to flatter
the.persecutton that tramples you under foot
and grinds you to powder! ^Gentlemen! I
am not accustomed to speak of circumstances
of this kind, and though familiarised as I
^ have been to them, when I come to speak of
'tbem, my* power fails me; my voice dies
within me ; I am not able to call upon you :'
it is now I ought to have strength ; it is now
I ought to have energy and voice ; bat I have
none. I am like the unfortunate state of the
country, perhaps like you. This is the time in
which £ ought to spe^ik if I can, or be dumb

«891

^fcT a Swdiiious Litd»

A. D, 1797.

[090

for ever; ia wbkh if you do totsfMakas
you ongjit, you ought to be duub lor ever.

Wbtat next Is complained of by the learned
counsel? That this publication asserts, that
the convictiun of Mr. Orr was obtained by
bribes admiDlstered by government lo an
informer, by whose evidence he fell. As ta
that, I beseech you, gentlemen, to consider
whether it be a candia representation ; is the
learned .counsel warranted by the fact? The
writer does not sav, that it was a bribe admi-
Qii>trred personally^ or directly by the lord
lieutenant to that witness. The sentence
Carries no sCich meaning ; if It did, I would
rnther lay down my brief and auit the court,
than rise the advocate of a filtny slander of
that kind. But that was not the meaning of
the writer : the writer means, thai informers
are brought forward in the present unfortu-
nate state of the countiy by the hopes of hire
and payment Is that a foul and false assert
tion r or will you Upon your oaths say to the
sister country, that there are no such abomir
nablf instruments of destruction as informers
used in the state prosecutions in Ireland?
Let me ask vou honestly what do you feel,
when in my hearine-^when in the fiice of this
audience, you are called upon to gite a verdict,
that every man of us and every man of you
knows by the testimony of your own eyes to be
utterly and absolutely false ? I speak not now
of the public proclamations for informers, with
a promise of secrecy and of extra vagantreviard ;
—I speak not of those unfortunate wretches,
who have been so often transferred from the
table to the dock, and from the dock to the
pillory; — I speak of what your own eyes have
«een day after day during the course of this
commission, from tHp boa where yoo amnow
sitting; the numbet of horrid miscreants,
who avowed upon tbeia oaths, that they h|ul
come from the seat of jnvemment, from th^
very chambers of the Castle, where they had
been worked upon by the A|ar of death and
the hopes of compensation lo sive evidence
against their fellows; that ^he mild the
wholesome and merciful councite of thu go-
vernment are holden over those catacombs
of living death, where the wretch that is
buried a man, lies till bis heart has time to
fester and dissolve, and is then dug up a
witness.

Is this fancy, or is it iiict ? Have you not
seen him, after his resurrection from that
tomb, after having been due out of the region
of death and corruption, niiUEe his appearance
upon the table, the living imase of life and of
death, and the supreme aroiier of bothf
Have yo« not marked when he entered, how
the stormy wave of the multitude retired at
his approach ? Have you not marked bow
the human heart bowed to the awful supre-
macy of his puiver. in the undiasembled ho-
mage of deferential horror ? How his glance,
like the lightning of heaven, seemed to rive
the body of the accused, and mark it for the
grave, while his voice warned the dirroted

wretch of woeamld^ath;adeath whieh tm
innocence can escape, no art elude, ao force
resist, no antidote prevent : there was an an-
tidote — a juror*s oath— but even that adaman*
tine chain, which hound the integrity of man
to the throne of eternal justice, is solved and
molten in the breath that issues from the in-
former>lnouth; conscience swings firom her
moorings, and the appalled and affrighted ju-
ror speaks what his soul abhors, and consults
his own safety in the surrender of the vio>
tim:—

-Et qus sibi quisque timebat.

1

Unius in miseri exitium conversa tulere.

Gentlemen, I feel I must have tired your
patience, but I have been forced into this
length by the prosecutor, who has thought fit
to introduce those extraordinary topics, and
to brina a question of mere politics to trial
under Uie form of a criminal prosecution. I
cannot say I am sorprisod that this has been
done, or that you snould be solicited by the
same inducements, and from the same mo-
tives, asJf your verdict were a vote of appro*
bation. I do not wonder that the government
of Ireland should stand appalled at the stale
to which we are reduced. I wonder not that
they should start at the public voice^ and la»
hour to stifle -or contradict it. I wonder not
that at this arduous crisis when the very ex*
istence of the empire is at stake, aod when its
strongest and most precious limb is not- girt
with the sword for battle, but pressed by the
tourniquet for amptitation; when they find
the coldness of death already begun in those
extremities where it never ends, that th^ are
terrified at what they have done, and wish to
say to the surviving parts of that empire,
<' they cannot say we did it.'' I wonder not
that they should consider their conduct as no
immaterial question for a court of criminal ju*
risdiction, and wish anxiously, as on an in-
quest of blood, for tlie kind acquittal of a
friendly jury. I wonder not that they shookl
wish to close the chasm they have opened hf
flinging you into the abyss. But trust me,
my countrymen, you might perwh in it, but
you vould not close it; tnist me, if it is yet
possiole to close it, it can be done only by
truth and honour ; trust me, that such an ef-
fect could no more be wrought by the sacrl*
fice of a jury, than by the sacrifice of Orr. As
a state measure, the one would be as unwise
and unavdiing as the other; but while yon
are yet upon the brink, while you are yet vi-
sible, let me, before we part, remind you once
more of your awful situation. The law upon
this subject gives you supreme dominion.
Hope not fftr much assistance from his lord-
ship. On such occasions perhaps the duty of
the Court is to be cold and neutral. I cannot
but admire the dignity he has supported dur-
ing this trial ; I am grateful for nis patience.
But let me tell you, it is not his province to
fim the sacred filame of patriotism in the jur>-
box. You.ara uj^n a great forward grouM,

901] 38 GEORGE III.

with- the people at your back^ and the govern*
nentin your front; you have neitfier the
<ibadvantage8 nor the excuses of juries a
century ago. No, thank God, never was
there a stronger characteristic distinction be-
Iween those times, upon which no man can
reflect witliout horror, and the present. You
iiave seen this trial conducted with* patience
and mildness by the Court. We have now
fio JefTeries with scurvy and vulgar conceits
to browbeat the prisoner, or perplex hiscoun*
scl. Such has oeen the improvement of
manners, and so calm the confidence of inte-
grity, that during the defence of accused per-
soils, the judges sit (quietly, and show them-
aelvcs .worthy of their situation, by bearing
with a mtid and merciful patience, the little
extravagancies of tlie bar, as you should bear
with the little extravagancies of the press.
The Court is mild and merciful, because if it
did.not give a temperate ear to passion, the
prtB^nerioouki not have the benefit of the
honest f<Mngs of bis advocate.
• Let me- then turn your eyes to that pattern
of. mildness in the bench. The press is your
advocate; bear with its excess, bear with
every thing but its bad intention. II it comes
as a villainous slanderer, treat is as such ; but
if it endeavour to raise the honour andgjory
of the country, temember that you reduce its
power to a non-i entity if you stop its animad-
vereions upon public measures ; you should
not dieck the efforts of genius, nor damp the
ardour of patriotism. In vain will you desire
the bird to soar, if you meanly or madly thi«fv^
from it its plumage. Beware, ■ lest under the
pretence of bearing down the licanttousness of
the piesB»"ypu extinguish it altogether, be*
!Mrare haw you rival the venal ferocity of those
licentious mitereiints who rob a printer of the
means of bread, and claim from deluded
royalty the reward of integrity and allegiance*
. One word more, ^ntlemen, and I have
done. I have been hitherto speaking of my
cfient, let me.say one word ip favour of your-'
selves and the. public. When the nation is
sinking under the tyranny of debaftched
counsels, what is it that gives it a chance of
being saved ? It is that the voice of the pub-
lic may reach even to the car of the first per-
sonage in the state, that he may know what
the people say. Let the patriot's heart be still
animated by showing that you guard the
libertyofthe press when it speaks to power
with aealy however unaccompanied bycere-
manial. You are now upon the edge of a
precipice, to which not many steps must con-
duct you; stop before you arrive at it; while
ymi are yet upon the hrirk, while you are yet
visible, let me remind you that the people
tttkY at length find repose from their troubles,
ana that yqu liave to. choose whether you wilf
be. numbered among' the instruments of their
degradation or the means of their deliverance.
Oentlemen, I might say, what my learned
coUeaguf has said. I did not know that I
should have had this duty to perform.' I

Trial qfPeUr Fineriy

{998

tbodght I sliould have sat as an auditor, not
appeared as an actor. I beseech you, if you
think it right to give any consideration lb the
arguments I have offered, to 'consider them
with the same honest candour with which
they are meant. I cannot be supposed to be
forgetful of my situation by introducing any
private sentiments into this discussion. [
know that men thinking long upon one sub*
ject may imagine they think right . I may
impute the same infirmity to you;— but I
feel strongly the reasons and basts of my own
judgment.

Gentlemen, I conjure you in the name of
your country, on the oath you have taken,
and in the presence of the ever-living God, to
reflect, that you have your character, your
consciences, and perhaps the ultimate destiny
of your country in your hands, that though
the day may soon come when oilr ashes shall
be scattered before tlie winds of heaven, yet
the memory of what you do cannot die ; it
must carry down to your posterity your honour
or your shame; in that awful name I do
therefore again conjure you to have mercy
upon your country and upon y«nrselves, and
so to judge now as you shtul hereafter be
judged ; and I do now submit the fate of my
client, • and of that country which we have yet
in common, to your disposal.

Repit.

Mf . Prime Serjeant — My Lord, and Gentle-
men of the Jury ; However ^vearied and fati-
gued you must be at this advanced period of
the day, of which there has been much
uiroecessary eonsumption, it becomes my
duty to tresoass upon you with some obser-
vationsy renqered' the more necessary by the
singular nsanner in which my learned friends,
the counsel for the traverser, have thought
proper to conduct his defence, if his defence
It can be called. For this the learned counsel
have made some excuse ; they told you they
were unprepared ; but tboush it were not the
hackiJieo case, a libeller's defence, little pre-
paration woukl serve their t«rn ; hence, there-
fore, it cannot be that they have brought
forward in his defence much of what they
have heretofore, and in another place, inef-
fectually advanced in the accusation of others.
The learned counsel who stated his case, set
out with a will turned eulogium on the trial
by jury, the sacred duty of the jurors, tuid the
Q>urt. He told you that with a jury to doubt,
should be to acquit ; that it was the bounden
duty of the judge, that his honor and 'con-
science called upon him, if he double<1, to
recommend to mercy. I readiiy subscribe to
a doctrine which I, in mv humble sphere,
have uniformly practised ; but did it occur to
the learned, eountel, that h\i panegyric was
the most pointed oondemnalion of that libel
which made the sacred duly of the jmlge and
jury the olgeet of its calumny f 0id it occur
to him, thitC the exceUence of the insiitutioD
was the htavicst aggravatiuct of the offbace of ^

9953

/or a Seriiliout LiM.

A. 6. »7d7.

CM4

fiis client ?— ipy learned friend did then, in the
overflowio|[ of his zeal, in the defence of the
fraversef, mdulce himself in a repetition of
much that had been alleged by himself and
btheM, elsewhere, and in strong and emphatic
terms called your attention to the parliamen-
tary conduct of a noble lord in another coun-
try ; and in defence of the traverser, found
occasion to pronounce a panegyric upon the
blood of the Plantagenets,— how relevant it is
fbryou toji^dge ; but what is most singular, is,
that, as if infected hy the libel of which he
undertook to be the defender, he seemed to
ibrget the sacred duty of jurors. He read to
you, as I collected, some passages from the
reprobated libel, the letter of Junius to the
king, and compared them with some passages
of tne hbel in question, not, I acknowledge,
to assert the innocence of cither, but to show
how far the one surpassed the other in malig-
nity, and de then told you, what the conduct
ofthejury was upon the trial of the publisher
of .that libel, and called upon you, acting
opon your oaths, to emulate their conduct by
the return of a similarand reprobated verdict ;
indeed, each of the learnect counsel, in his
address to you, called npon yon to imitate the
conduct ofjuries in Great Britsun, acting upon
their oaths, and upon the evidence before
them ; the juries on the trial of Hardy, TheU
wall, and others, were heldont to you for imi-
tation ^ was there no Irish jury worthy of your
imitation ^ — ^were the verdicts of the juries
who tried Jac^kson,* Weldon,t Dunn,{ and a
long list of traitors and conspirators, which
have disgraced this once happy country ever
questioned f — alt convicted, tnough defended
Sy the abilities of one of my learned friends.

It is natural that he at least should recur to
the success of others, and not to his own de-
feats, for eiamples to his purpose. But if a
jory were to regulate itself by any rule but
that of Evidence, national feeling would prefer
t national example. Differing from the
learned counsel for the traverser, I caution
you against following any example ; blot from

2 our recollection any thing you may before
[lis day have heard upon the subject ; attend
only to the evidence, respect the law, as it
niav be stated to you by the learned judge,
ana upon the evidence and the law exercise
that discretion with which the constitution
has entrusted you.

The learned coimscl, who spoke to the
evidence for the Iravcrsery wished you to re-
collect much which he said, and to my as-
tonishment, he omitted to request you to
forget much also, for he set out with telling

eU that the times were com moved, and to
mquilUze them, he arraigned, not the
statute, that would be nothing — but the cnm-
inon lav of the land ; he censured that law

which would not permit the traverser to give

.. .

• See hh trial, flitf^ vol. «5, p. 783.
t See his trial, p. 935, of this volume.
) 9eehhl trial, ^. 839^ of this vohuae*
VOL. XXVI.

I I

evidenre of the truth of the libellous matter,
but he did not tell you as I do, that the libeller
is thereby, and thereby only, secure against
detection in the most hbelious falsehood, and
your own feelings will tell you that an inad-
missible ofr?r to prove it5 truth, is an aggra-
vation of his oftence. The learned counsel.
as I conceive, mistook the law when he in-
formed you, that the traverser had no right
to challenge any of you, as his jurors, as he
did the fact, when he stitcd that you were
arrayed by an officer ay) pointed by the crown,
Why those observations? In compliment ^o
tlic cause of his client, and to disparage, if
possible, that verdict which he knew you,
acting upon your oaths, must give. This
therefore was to be marked as a state prosccu-
tion, your venlict was to be considered as the
verdict of a jury, against whom no challenge
lay, and arrayed by an oflicer of the nomina-
tion of the prosecutor — but as a lawyer, I tell
you, that a challens^e does lie, anil that the
sheriffs wlio relarnci you, arc not nominated
by the crown, or dependant on its approba-
tion. As if infected oy the spirit of the libel-
the learned counsel, it I mistake not, has tola
you, that the security of a juror's oath was
shaken, that juries capitulating with their
fears, and to preserve their own lives, have
complimented the informer with the lives of
the accused, and to impress it upon the public
mind, has had recourse to his classic treasures,

— — £t quse si hi quisque timebat

Unius in miseri exitium conversa tulere.
could they afford him no quotation, but one
which contributed to lead a credulous natioD
to its ruin ? The Trojans believed and Were,
undone, and I trust that the learned coimsel
did not see the alarming mischief of tl^e ob-
servation, and that he would upon reflection,
wish it consigned to oblivion. Did the learned
counsel think that such observations could
deter men of honour and fortitude from a dis-
charge of their duty, or that by the horror of
his fancy pieces they could be frighted from a
recollection of their oaths? The learned
counsel has indulged himself in a splendid,
but irrelevant declamation, and repetition of
all those subjects, which f^r some time past
have unfortunately agitated this once happy
country, you have long since read them in the
different prints, you have this day heard them,
you may compare them; you have long ana
severely felt tncir effects.

But I owe it to our honourable profession
to tell you, that much is allowable to counsel
in the defence of the-accused, it may be com-
mendable in them to recur to and make use
of every topic, however remotely connected,
which may contribute to their success in the
sacred duty which they have undertaken, and
particulariy if the case (like this) shall W^i
admit of any defence. — Hence I truU H was
and not to commove the country by Jrah7cfn£
into the toortd an impressive comment upon this
libel, that that wMich you expected would
have been ^e defence of the traverser, has

39

9953

3S GEORGK III.

Trial qfPeier Tintriy

[996

hMn nolbing more ihan a vindicalion of
j>arly and opinion, and a repetition of that
arraignment of the government of the country
lirhich had been before often made by my
learned friends, and as often answered and
refuted, but from us, to whom your attention
has been called as prosecuting for the crown,
an attention- which we confidently challenge,
a different conduct is expected, we disdain all
address, all inflammatory language ; unadorn-
ed facts, plain common sense, the utmost
good faith with the Court and the Jury are
the indispensable duties of prosecutors for
the crown. How conscientiously we have
discharged those duties, let even the unfor-
tunate men whom it was our painful duty to
i)rosecutey declare, but I find that example
eads me also from the subject proper foF
jour consideration, you have already heard
that the traverser is not brought before you
upon a charge officially made by the attorney
general, but upon a charge mside by a grand
jury of your county, acting and declaring
upon their oaths, that the nbel in question
was published to molest and disturb the public
peace and tranquillity of the kingdom, to
disparage the administration of justice, and to
represent the chief governor as acting inhu-
manly and wickedly in not extending mercy
where he should, these conclusions of the
grand jury you are not to adopt, unless the
evidence which has been produced, shall upon
eoDsideration call upon you so to do, and if it
does, I am confident that you wilt, regardless
of the terror of the traverser with which my
lecotlection tells me you were menaced.

Too successful have the enemies of this
country been in their endeavours to indispose
the people to their political situation, but
there was one consoling hold, from which
there had been no attempt to remove them,
one comfort of which there had been no at-
tempt made to deprive them, their confidence
in the adminittration qfjuttice; for the traverser
it was reserved to make a daring attack upon
the temple of justice and mercy, prophaning
its altars, and reviling its ministns; the un-
fortunate traverser, the instrument of a party,
some of them spectators possibly of the dis-
graceful situation in which he stands. The
criminal code immediately affects the mass of
the people^ and for the traverser it was
leserved to make the first attempt to desecrate
the administration of criminal justice, and by
iriU^ing the mild and merciful law of Eng-
land, to prepare the minds of the mass of the
people for a revolutionary tribunal^ and its at-
tenoant guillotine.

The traverser has made an affidavit, that he
is the sole proprietor of the paper in which
this libel has appeared; I hope he is so, and
tkai he did not recur to perjury, to qualify
himaiffto be a libeller; there is a circumstance
cbafiimatory of his affidavit ; he has remained
in confinement two months upon a bailable
offence ; it is scarcely possible, that he should
be 10 desertcdjt andyet connected with others ;

it is scarcely possible, that he should be of the
brotherhood, and yet left in gaol so lone; but
if it is possible, and that he is only the os-
tensible partner in this alarming establish-
ment, fet his fate,— let his unbailed situaUon
for two months, be a warning to those who
may be solicited to lend their names to give
currency to sedition ; let them recollect that
on the day of trial, no defence eithjr was, or
could be made for him ; he had an host ol
lawyers of the first abilities; he had all the
pride, pomp and circumstance of a dwtin*
guished libeller : his vanity may have beea
gratified by hearing himself connect^ witti
the topics of party here and in Great BnUin,
by finding himself joined in the same sentence
with the names of Pitt and Fox, and finding
his efforts connected with those of a noble
lord in England ; but if I might presume to
judge, the noble lord will not feel himself
much honoured by the alliance which has
been formed for him, or pleased with the co-.
adjutor assigned to him. ^

Having, I trust, if it was necessary,jguaraett
you against the effects of those addresses,
which have been made to you on the part of
the traverser, it is for roe to state to you, that
there are two questions for your consideration
—first, whether this libel has been published
by the traverser? Much of your time, and
that of the Court, has been taken up in the
discussion of a question, which really did not
arise. I never was so astonished as when I
hcaid gentlemen of abilities and experience
contend, that there was no evidence for your
consideration with regard to the fact of pub-
lication. It has been proved, that m purst*-
ance of the direction of the act for preserving
the liberty of the pjrcss, an affidavit was made
bv a person assuming the name of Peter Fh
nerty, and stating him to be the sole pro-
prietor of the paper, intituled "The Press,*'
and stating the place of publication. The pur- •
chase of the paper was proved to have been
made in Church-lane, the place referred to
by the affidavit. The paper was incontrover-
tibly identified by the testimony of two wit^
ncsses. The traverser upon being arrested in
the very house referred to by the affidavit,
avowed himself to be the printer and pub-
lisher of the " The Press." The law requires,
that upon every change of property ma news-
paper, such change shonld be stated bj alfr-
davit, and provides that unless this is so
stated, the former proprietor should be rt^
sponsible. It rests with jrou, gcnUemn^,
upon this evidence to determine, whether tne
traverser was the publisher of the paper m
question. The able and respected authon^
of the Court will, 1 presume to say, mfota
you, that the evidence is more saUsfacfoiy
evidence than that which would anseflwnst-
militude of hand-wriUng, and wiH mfom
you, that though the legislature, from the
difficulty of obuining satisfactory evidence
against the publishers of libels^ bad w^ati-
tuttd inferior, or secondary evidence, tuei «

wn

for a Seditious Libel.

never intended to exclude the best ; jou
are lo determine what weight it ought to have ;
and prosecuting for the crown, I tell you,
that if you have a rational doubt upon the
point, you should acquit the traverser.
* The evidence with respect to the question
of publication being disposed of, it remains,
secondly, to be considered, whether the pa-
per is a libel ? and if it be, with what inten-
tion it was published > The learned judge is
bound by the law to give you his opinion, whe-
ther it is a libel or not : and having hear(f his
dpinion^ the whole is open for your consider-
iation. The learned counsel attempted to
prove, that there was no charge made by the
nbel against the learned judge who presided
at the trial, and endeavmired to draw your
attention from'that part of the libel, and to
tonfine its malignity to an higher authority.
' The first charge made by the indictment
for this libel is — I am sorry to address you
upon this subject, but I trust that I am 'ad-
dressing men not yet hardened; and if I am,
though I can judge of— I cannot describe your
feelings and indignation. The libel presumes
to disparage the decision of an high and
learned juage, and twelve men upon their
oaths, where the life of a fellow creature was
hi 'question, and represents it a base and
wicked murder, procured by perjury and ter-
ror. What is become of the natural milkiness
bf the Irish character ? Surely you are not
80 habituated to blood, by the numerous con-
victions for treason, conspiracy and murder,
which have been had, as to hear those words
without that prompt and honest indignation
which declares them false, mischievous, and
wicke<1. The libel states : " the death of Mr.
Orrthe nation has pronounced one of the
most sanguinary and savage acts that had dis-
naced the laws. In perjury, did you not
hear, my lord, the verdict was given— per-
jury accompanied with terror, as terror has
marked every step of your government. Ven-
geance and desolation were to fall on those
who would not plunge themselves in blood.''
— Whatf Gentlemen, have you heard of
the trials for treason, murder, and for con-
spiracy to murder ? If they have not blunted
your feelings, you must feel that not only
Your countrv is disgraced, but human nature
olasphemed by sucn a publication. It is how-
ever but just to say, that the publication has
not been defended.

Grentlemen, it has been well and truly re-
marked, that no roan will, without evidence,
charee another with an internal crime, whose
own neart does not tell him of the possibility
of its commission.

The next paragraph in the ])aper to which
I ahaU call your attention (and in truth this is
the only lillel I ever read, in which there was
not some colourable paragraph), charges the
lord lieutenant with a want of humanity, and
it is a gross and monstrous aggravation of the
libel to defend it in the manner you have seen ;
«n attempt to mislead the jury and the people :

A. b. 1797.

199$

but I tnist, that neither you nor the public
are to be misled. The artifice is too obvious.
An attempt has been made to submit to your
consideration some affidavits alleged to have
been made by some of the jury, in violation
of that wholesome principle of larc, which wilt
not tuffer the verdict of a jury given upon their
oaths to be done away^ or disparaged by their
subsequent offidavits. See what . the conse-
quence would be. See whether your proper-
ties, your lives, or your honours would be
safe, if that rule were to be departed from.
You are acquitted this day by the verdict of a
jury : when are you to be at ease, if the law
admitted of the impeachment of such a ver-
dict by subsequent affidavits } not in those
days of terror when conspiracy and assassina-
tion are so busily employed, and so fatally
successful. It is the established principle of
the law, not to receive the affidavit of a jury-
man disparaging himself and affirming his
own turpitude ; but here, you were tola, the
jurors assumed the complicated guilt of per*
jury and murder — there is no rule more es-.
sentially necessary to the peace, the welfare,
and the happiness of civilized society. If
such affidavits were made, charity induces me^
to believe, that the unhappy piakers did,
under the influence of terror, assume the guilt
of murder and perjury.

The libel states that the chief governor de-
nied mercy where it ought to be granted.
Will any man entertain a doubt that it would
be a libel to charge him with a verdict in a case
of the slightest import against his oath ? and
here is a charge of nothing less than wicked
mnrder under the form of law, by a denial of
mercy ! and yet you, gentlemen, are told that
this is not a libel. '

The learned judge has, in ruling a question
of evidence, stated to you, what the law of
England has been to this day, and has in-
formed you, that the great question for your
consideration was — " What was the object and
intention of the publication?" Great God !
will any roan, who hears me, believe, that if
for any one of those unfortunate creatures'
that are from day to day brou^-ht to this bar,
a cool and well-founded application for mercy
was made, that it would be denied ? If any *
man so believes, I thank God that he has
formed my mind of different materials ; and
I feel a confidence, that I address a jury too
just, and loo conscientious to impute to an-
other that a^inst which their own nature re-
volts—a denial of mercy, where it should be
^nted ! It would be a murder, aggravated
by perjury ; for the chief governor is bound
by an oath as solemn and as binding as that
under which you shall pronounce your verdict.

Gentlemen, you will recollect the occasion
which the counsel took, not to speak to the
defence of the traverser, but to arraign the
wisdom of those laws which the situation of
the country rendered unfortunately ncccs-
saiT ; and to talk of emancipation and reform 4
as if the defence of the unfortunate roisginded

999] 38 GBOftOE 111.

and deserted traverser, was nmnected withl
such topics. How far h is defence is connected
with those topics upon which his counsel has
been so eloqueut and loud, I leave 3'ou to de-
termine. Is there a word in the libel looking
towards emancipation or reform? the blood
of the Plantagenels ; or what was offered to
he proved at the bar of the House of Ijords in
Ireland, or the House of Lords in Great Bri-
tain ? and yet upon these topics^ how many
long hours have been jconsumed in a court of
criminal jurisdiction.

Geutlemen^ the libel proceeds to sUte that
— " It was ^o compliment to the native cle-
mency of a Camden that the present lord lieu-
tenant was sent into Ireland." Here, I say, I
am astonislied^ that the name of Camden did
not restrain the malignant peno--that a grate-
ful recollection of the name of Camden, the
first assertor of those principles upon which
the liberty of the press at this day stands, did
not arrest the arm of calumny. Character is
like the spear of Ithuriel. Falsehood cannot
bear its touch, and however disguised returns
to its own likeness. Did it not occur to the
libeller, that the noble lord did by bis private
life give the strongest refutation x>f the ca-
lumny—a life disUnguished by an unaffected
practice of ail those domestic virtues and en-
dearing charities which so eminently distin-
ijuish the royal character, whose representa-
tive be is. Believe me, gentlemen, private
virtue gives the best assurance of the faithful
and conscientious discharge of public trust.

^/ Massacre and rape, military murder, deso-
lation and terror.'* Here are words calculated
Jo disturb the peace and tranquillity of the
kuigdom, and prepare the people, as the libel
prophesies, and intends, to look for another
government. But the learned counsel has
told you, that this libel is notat all conversant
of the trial of Mr. Orr, and that it relatesonly to
the subsequent department of justice. Your
attention has been heretofore pointed to this
part of the libel : nhose duty was it to state to
the jury that the evidence wai doubtful ¥ the
duty of the judge. Whose duty was it to state
to the executive, that he doubted f the duty of
tlic judge. The libel has not in the rage of iU
calumny even ventured to assert,that thelearned
judjse entertained a doubt, though it basely
insinuates that the judge did recommend, ^d
that the chief governor, deaf to the calls of
jy^^'ce, permitted an innocent man to be mur-
dered by the forms of law. The libel proceeds,
and admitting the truth of the evidence,
questions the justice of the sentence, and the
learned counsel endeavours, by the splendor of
his diction, to palliate the enormity of a crime
which, under the hypocritical cant of union
and atiection, has usurped a dominion over
credulous and superstitious ignorance, and has
made the sacred obligation of an oaih the bond
and pledge of a wicked and alarming union^
which threatens the very existence of the nation;
the subversion of all order, and a deprivation o^
all the blessings of civiliaed iociety.

TfM^PehrJvt^

[}OQa

Gentlemen, I fear that I kave intiuded Iqq
long upon your time, yet it is necestai;y to
trespass on your attention a little longer.
The learned counsel who op^ed the casetof
the traverser has informed yoa, that it is tba
duty of the jury to acquit, if there be any
doubt upon their minds, and that it is the du^
of the judge, if lie is dissatisfied with the
verdict, to recommend to mercy ; I subscribe
implicitly to that doctrine, and whenever (
had the honour to act in a judicial capacity, I
never did in a capital case omit to oill upon
the jury, in the mostempbatical terms, if thigr
had any rational doubt operating upon their
minds, to acquit. When I have disamed
with the jury, or upon mature reflexion, found
a circuinstance in favuur of a convict, I have
never omitted to recommend to mercy, and
have klways found the humanity of the go*
vernment aniiously concurrent with my re-
commendation. How wicked then is tha
libel, which makes the situation of a judge
unendurable by any man of humanity and
honour.

** Let, however," sUtes the ly^el, " the awful
execution of Mr. Orr be a lesson to all un«
thinking juries; and let them cease to flattef
themselves, that the soberest recomroendaSioQ
of theirs and of the presiding judee can
stop the course of earna^.'' If there be one
part of the libel more wicked than another, it
IS this: It insinuates, that the judge wb^
presided had recommended the convkt to
royal mercy, and that such recommendation
was slighted. I ask, and I address ajudge of
high and honourable character, would he sit a
moment upon a bench, of which he is so great
an ornament, if his cecomnendation were
overlooked, and he were made the instrumeni
of murder.^ The libeller knew, thai upon
the premises which he assumed, it was the
duty of the judge to recommend — and to ^ve
colour to this cakinmy, he insinuates thiA be
did, and that his recommendation was disre-
garded ; and here, gentlemen, I call your at-
tention to the facts resulting from the evi-
dence of the learned judge. He was askeq,
if the recommendation of tliejury had nojt
been forwarded to the lord lieutenant; he frefr-
ly told you it was. But it is fitting you should
know, that judges most distinguished for their
humanity have ever considered the recom-
mendatiun of a jury (having upon their oaths
returned their verdict guilty afler a solema
call to acquit, if they entertained a dpubt) as a
mere extrajudicial' effusion of amiable weak-
ness. It IS nothing more than telling the
judge — We hove done our duty on our $a{hs^
do, my lord, forget that you are upon your OStL
and recommend him as an ot^ect of mercy ^ ^
whose guilt we entertain no doubt. But waa
the noble lord interrogated, whether h£ hf|l
recommended to mercv ; though the poiat of
the libel, as a^nst the lord lieutenant, !s,
that in slight of such recommendation, men^,
was denied ? and here let me aeknowle(l||^
the candour of the learned oiunse], who n&

UWl]

Jbr a SedMam Liiek-

A. D. 179?.

tiooa

«poken to the evidence forthetravenier: he
has abandoned that fabe su|:ge6tion of the
libel, acd in all that he has said, has. not even
insinuated that Uie noble judge did ever re-
commend.

But I much lament that the learned coun-
sel recurred to some Nisi Prius address, which
could only tend to mislead the ignorant. The
law in cases of libel wisely foroids any eo-
•quiry into the truth or falsehood of the libel-
lous matter, and the cousequences of this
principle the learned counsel endeavours to
represent as an admission on the part of the
prosecution of the truth of the libel : was
the enquiry stopped or resisted on the part
of the prosecution ? dkl uotyou,my lord, call
upon the counsel of the traverser to state the
4>biect of their intended exanination? and
upon their avowal of it — did you not» actiag
on your oath, and warranted by the unanirooud
Apinlon of the twelve judges of £ngland|
stop the enquiry ?

Gentlemen, much has been said, whicht
though unconnected with the real object for
your consideration, might call for observation,
if the lateness of the hour permitted ; but
there are one or two points in the address of
the learned counsel which I cannotpassover;
would to God, for the honour of this our
country, that it was not already too well
known, that the private murder and assassi-
nation of such as should give evidence on the
part of the crown, that is, of the public peace,
was one savage fieature of that system of
terror which was to be established; how
many who have given information have been
assassipaled ? The humanity of the legisla-
ture in the hope of stopping the progress of a
crime* of such national disgrace, by removing
the motive, provided that Uie informations of
such as should be murdered, or violently put
to death, should be received in evidence
against the parties thereby charged ; but their
expectations were disappointed, and day afler
day you have been sickened with trials for
murder, or conspiracies to murder persons
who had given informations on the part of
the crown. What a trial had you yesterday,
when three plao^ for the murder of a man,
who had given informations, appeared to have
been the subject of cool discussion ! Under
these circumstances, it requires an estraor-
dinary degree of fortitude to come forward to
give evidence ; and if men, from a sense of
returning duty and repenting virtue, come
forward to disclose and to prevent the com-
pletion of those crimes of which they either
participated or were informed, are they there-
fore to be left (it the mercv of the poignard of
the assassin? Their evidence roust ever be
a subject for the poioted observation of the
Court, and the serious consideratioo of the
jury. How many witnesses have told jrou
during this session, to which your attention
ba^ .been called, that to avoid assassination,
tliev arc obliged to change their Mgiog^
O'ght^ i To the evidence of such men «s 1

II

coQceivd the learned couasei would distin*.
guish a3 ibforniers, you owe tbe detection
of the high treason of Jackson, planning
and preparing for the invasion of this
country ; and you have heard that the plot,
ripe for the murder of the witness on the,
night preceding the trial, was defeated by!
accident.* Of Weldon, and the otherawho
attempted to seduce the army« and of many
other^ to avoid prejudgment^ X will not maka
mention ; yet to give colour to the libel, the
protection of such men, ia the only place
where it is probable tbeir lives would be safe
from the assassin^s attack, is brought in charge:
against tbe jnovecnment of the country. £ver/
man in society owes an honest informer pro^
tectioQ ; the perjured informer^ as he merits,
has the execration of all mankind ; aor will
the aU-aeeing 'God, to whom the learned
counsel has made so solemn an appeal, fail
to enlighten and direct a cautious and humane
judge, and a disccvnisg jttry to his detection.
There is but one other point to which- 1
shall call yotir attentbn ; the learned counsel
has applied all 1ms powers in the vain endet-w
vour to represent a conduct, the genuine result
of humanity and feeFing, as cruel and wicked*
trifling with the hapea and fears of the uafor-
tunate sufferer and bis family, liord Yelvcr«
ton has told you that the chief governor,
quick and alive to tbe call of mercy, granted
three respites to the unfortunate suSecer;. not
for the purpose of agonizing him with hopes
and fears, and dashing, with bitteroesa that
cup which was not to pass from him ; no, the
chief governor listeneo to tb^ voice of huma*
nity ; he wished— ejtd who would ant wi»h.-^
to find a justifiable way to mwcy-^Xn r^
pater ^ro/— thrice was the sword Of justice
uplifled, thrice did his humaoity, in hope of
the appearance of some circumstance to JU9^
tify hia iaterpoeitiofli, arre&t it :

^ Tbriee juctioe urgod-^^uid thrioa Hhe slack-^

'ning sinews
« Forgot tbetr office, and confess'd tha roaa."*

But justice at length prevailed, in Pterin
despigbt of nature.

I concur with the learned sentlemen in
tbe panegyrics which they had pronounced
upon the liberty of tlie pres9, which consi3t9
in laying no restraint upon publications* end
not in freedom from censure when crinwaJl
matter is published ; every man ha$ a right
to lay what sentiments he pleases bef<ire the
public; to forbid thati would be to ^iestroy
the freedom of the press ; but if be pid^lbhes^
what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he
must take the coniequeoce of his own teme-
rity ; the will of individuals is free, the »JtNgv»9
of that free will is the object of legal punish-
ment; 1 agree with the learned ooiinsel, that
a free press is essential to the nature of a free
state, but b^ a temperate, legal, and dij^creet

>t a »■

• See the tri^l of leary, p. ai5, and of
Gleooan and others, p. 437 of tbi$ volMmc-

1003] 38 GEORGE III.

useofit only can it be preserved. It is the
eonttUiUional centinel of the 'people ; but by Us
UcentiousneUy it maif become the most dangerous
traitor. Let tlie freedom of the press, and
the purity of the tiial by hiry continue for
ever; but sacrifice not, I beseech you, the
sanctity of the one, to the licentiousness of
the other. I have only to call upon you to
consider the sacred duty ^ou have undertaken
to consider the publication, and if you can
prevail upon yourselves to believe, that it was
not published with the motives imputed to it
by the indictment, in God*s name acquit the
traverser ; but if you believe that it was, I
call upon you, as men of conscience and of
fortitude, regardless of insinuations, and supe-
rior to terror, whatever the^onsequence may
be, to find him guilty.

X have endeavoured to discharge my duty,
I am confident you will discharge yours.

Suxxisro vp.

Mr. Justice Dowries, — Gentlemen of the
Jury; I have to address you after a very long
trial — after much time has been mispent in
attracting your attention to points no way
material to the cause. You have been
amused by the display of eloquence, but
running wide of the mattes before you. I
shall endeavour to point out to you what are
the objects of your consideration, divested of
all that irrelevant matter which has been
addressed to you.

Gentlemen, the prisoner at the bar is
indicted for publishing a libel;— first then,
you are to consider, whether he is the pub-
lisher of the matter called a libel ; and the
intent with which it was published ; aud you
are to consider also, whether the innuendos,
which are stated upon the record are well and
properly applied ; that is nothing more, than
where in the record it is stated, that by any
expression the libel means such a thing, or
allusions are made to the trial of Orr, or
particular persons ; you are to consider whe-
ther the matter bears that construction which
is imputed to it or not. Secondly, if you be
of opmion, that the prisoner published the
paper, and that the innuendos are properly
applied, yoti are to consider whether the
]»per be a libel; and if you are of opinion
tnat it is, and that it was published with a
malicious intent, I am persuaded that you
know your duty too well, not to find him
guilty.— But I agree with the counsel on both
sides, that if you have any rational doubt of
the publication, you should acquit hiin.

As to the first, whether the prisoner be the
publisher of the paper which is charged to be
a libel, in my apprehension, there is strong
evidence for your consideration. But it is
for you to determine, whether it carries to
your minds the force of conviction, that he
was the publisher of it. You find a witness
produced, who bought this paper at the
<>fBce, No. 4, Church-lane ; the paper so pub-
lished is identified by the witness, and is

Trial of Peter Finerly

[1004

traced from the time of the purchase to ita
production in court ; it was handed as the
witness tells you, only to one person, the
father of the witness, and the father swears
it was not out of his sight except when it was
locked up by him, untu he returned it to the
son. Both of them were examined, and the
son swears that the paper returned to him ia
the paper he bought and is the paper now
produced. Therefore, if you believe that
testimnnv. there is no doubt as to the paper
being published at that house. See then bow
, major Sirr connects it with the prisoner. He
arrested the prisoner at the Press OfiSce, No.
4, Church-lane, and asked him was his name
Peter Finerty; he said it was ; he asked him,
was he publisher of the paper called the
Press? he said he was; upon that evidence
of having admitted himself to be the pub*
lisher of that paper a few days after the time
when the paper produced was bought at
that very place — whether that leaves any
rational doubt, that he was the publisher of
the paper produced, you are to determine*
I am not to give you any positive opinion as
to that; it is not my province to interfere
with that; I state the evidence, which I think
is evidence to go to you, and it is for you to
determine upon your oaths, that question,^
whether he published this paper? or whether
you have any rational doubt upon it?— If you
are satisfied that he did publish it, then see
whether it be a libel, and whether the innu-
endos are properly applied ?

Gentlemen, a late act of parliament, as
has been truly said, has reposed in you the
final decision of that question. The same
act of parliament provides, however, that the
judge who tries the cause in cases of libel»
shall give his opinion to the jury. There-
fore it IS incumbent upon me to state my opi-
nion upon this paper ; it is for you, eittier to
follow or to reject it, as you find in your own
consciences you ougdt. But in the execution
of that duty which the law imposes upon roe,
I am bound to say this— that a paper which
grossly reflects upon the justice of the
country, as this paper appears to me to do,
is a libel. If this paper does endeavour to
degrade the administration of justice in the
minds of the people, as to me it appears to
do, if you shall be of opinion, that such is
the tendency of it, such a paper is in my
mind a libel. If this paper represents to the
public the trial and conviction of a man in
the ordinary course of justice, as a foul con-
spiracy against the life of an innocent man, to
be effected by means of perjury in the wit-
nesses, and drunkenness in the jury— if it
represents (as to me it seems to do) those
diabolical means as used to procure the con-
viction of that man— if it brands with the
name of murder the execution of a convicted
criminal— judge for yourselves, whether it is
a libel or not, I can have no doubt that it is.
—If this does, as in my mind it appnrs to
do, charge a jury of the country with onDgio^

1005]

Jqy a Scdiiiovs LibeL

A. D. 1797*

[1000

ID a verdict in a capital case in a state of
beastly drunkenness, it is a libel.^If this
paper, as it appears to me to do, represents
the conviction of a criminal in the ordinary
course of justice, as the result of perjury in
^witnesses, procured by reward, and of drunk-
enness in the jury, I feel myself under that
oath by which I act, bound to tell you, that
b a libcL If this paper, as in my judgment
it appears to do, represents the king^ go-
'vernor of this country as regardless of nis
duty— violating the sacred trust reposed in
bim by his majesty, in a most important
point — if it represents him to be so obdurate
to the impressions of justice or mercy, as to
suffer a convict to be executed, knowinz
him to be innocent,— ^f it describes the lord
lieutenant as disregarding the recommenda-
tions of the judges and juries who may try
prisoners — if this paper holds out to the
public that he would pay no manner of at-
tention to such circumstances, but that he
would knowinzly suScr an innocent man to
be executed, there can be no doubt, that it is
a most flagitious libel.

Gentlemen, i have made these observa-
tions upon this paper. Whether they are
just, or satisfy you, as they do rne, that this
paper is a libel, is for your good sense to de-
termine.

Gentlemen, having stated shortly these
matters, for in truth I am not disposed to
take up much of your time, the case appearing
to be simple and plain, notw^hstandmg the
ihany hours it has taken up ; one other ob-
servation I will make, — if it strikes you in
the same way, I feel m vself compelled to call
this paper a libel. If this appears tovou, as
it does to me, that even supposing the evi-
dence against Oit to have been true, then
this paper insinuates and endeavours to cause
it to be believed, that the offence was in
itself no crime — that even supposing the
evidence to have been true, he was executed
lor a meritorious act. — With what view could
that be held out but to irritate the public
mind— to cast unjust censure upon the law,
the government, and the administration of
justice? — ^That compels me to say it is a
libel; and if these observations strike you as
they do me, the indictment has introduced
the libel truly upon the record, when it says,
that the defendant " devising and intending
the peace and public tranmiiUity of the king-
dom^ to disturb, and to Jbring the trial of
William Orr, and the verdict had in the due
eours# of law into hatrf.d| contempt, and
scandal, and to persuade the subjects to
believe, that the trial was unduly had— and
that Orr undeservedly died— that the lord
lieutenant ought to have extended pardon to
him, and that in not extending it, he acted
inhumanly, wickedly, and unjustly, and in a
manner unworthy of the trust committed to
bim by the kine m that behalf,"— did publish
this libel. *

Gentlemen, if the observations I have

I made upon the paper, which will go up .to
you, and which you will consider as you
would in your closets — if, I say, these obser-
vations are founded, this charge against the
prisoner is fully proved.

Gentlemen, suffer me to say a word with
respect to the intent charged a|;ainst the
printer, in publisUing the paper. Where no
evidence is given to show that the publication
was innocent, as where a man intending to
give a letter to another, pulls a libel out of
his pocket by mistake, or in various other
cases which may be imagined of a publica-
tion of a libel with perfect innocence : — in
all such cases if it does not appear on the
evidence for the crown, that the act of publi-
cation was innocent, it is incumbent upon the
party accused, to show those circumstances
from which the innocence of the act of pub«
lication is to be inferred ; and where that is
not done, where are vou to look for the intent
of the publication, but in the paper itself?
— it is not incumbent upon the crown, and
in many cases it would be impossible for the
prosecutor, to show any peculiar malicious
mtent distinct from the natural inference to
be drawn from the paper itself. He must
rest upon the paper itself; and if the jury
look upon it, and can find a malicious intent
there, it is sufficient for their verdict. In my
apprehension, this doctrine ought not to sur-
prise an honest and a sensible jurv ; it bas

. been always held in every court, whose pro*
ceedings I have had an opportunity of observ-
ing, ft does no injustice ; it is supposing no
more, than that a man is conusant of his
own acts, ^he knows what he jdoei^ and that
he intends to do what he actually does. If a
man publish a work of wit and humour, in
other respects innocent, it may be inferred
from the work itself, that his intention was
to amuse. If be publish a work of science,
it may be inferred that his intention was to
inform. — So if the publication does in fact
calumniate and defame, maylt not with equal

justice be inferred from the libel, that he
published it with an intent to calumniate and
defame. No other intent is necessary to be
shown by the crown, but that resulting from
the paper itself; no circumstances being
shown by the prisoner which can vary that
intent.

Gentlemen, there is another part of this
case to which I think it my duty to advert
You will recollect, that the counsel for the
prisoner stated a mass of matter, going
through the whole of the libel, and stating
that he would produce evidence of it, reflect-
ing upon that trial of Orr, who has been tu)n-
victea below— facts which he asserted would
go to prove the libel to be true, and resting
the defence of his client upon that publica-
tion. Gentlemen, I did, as it was my duty,
reject such evidence, because it has been
immemorially the common law of these king-
doms, that such evidence is immaterial, and
forms no manner of defence— and it is not

1007] 38 GEORGE HI.

!n tfie power of any lawyer to trace the time
#heD ttie law was otherwise. It has been
uniformly so considered, even down to the
time when the bill was before the>two Houses
of Parliament in England from whence the
act of parliament under which you now act
was copied, and this rule of law is unchanjged
hj that act of parliament. At that time
iraiious questions were put to all the judges
df England by the Lords, for the purpose of
assisting the legislature in framing that bill,
and I have already read one of the questions
put to Uiem, it was this — ^* Is the truth or
falsehood of the written or printed paper
material, or to be left to the jury upon the
trial of an indictment or information for a
libel ; and does it make any difference in this
respect, whether the epithet fat$e, be or be
Hot used in the indictment or information V
The judges answered that question unant-
motisry; and upon that answer I ground my
opinion, knowine that it is founded upon the
law of the land. The answer is in these
words; <' This question consists of two
branches, our answer to the first branch of
this cjuestion is, that the truth or falsehood of
a wrttien or printed paper is not material, or
t» be Icfl to the jfury on the trial of an indict-
ment or information for a libel. We consider
this doctrine as so firmly settled, and so essen-
tially necessary to the maintenance of the
king's peace, and the fcood order of society,
that it cannot now he (Jrawn into debate.*^

The judges have said, that they consider
that doctnne essentially necessary to the
maintenance of the king^s peace, and the
eood Order of society — And so it is — What is
the reason of that rule of law ?— The meanine
ind reason of it is, (for there is no rule or
law, that is not fqunded in eood sense and
plain reason), that no man shall be accused
«r crimes, but by due course of law— that
there shall be no temptation held out to a
violation of the public peace, by calumniating
persons in libels, instead of bringing those
persons to answer in the ordinary course of
justice — that a man shaH not be cruelly
punished, and without a trial, as In fact he is
oy a libel charging him with crimes. And
the reason of the rule is strongly illustrated
by this— that the libel would itself operate as
an indict;nenty if the publisher of it were
prosecuted, and if the nbel charged a crime,
suppose murder, the inquiry into the truth of
h would be had before a court and jury, who
•ould not punish it if the charge were found
to be true— and if any man thought fit to
libel the verdict of a jury, or the decisions of
a court of justice, is that verdict, or are those
decisions to be tried here collaterally upon an
indictment fbr the libel ? — Is tlie conduct of
the judge to be brought into discussion here,
6r is such a libeller to be led unpunished ? —
The court which sits to try the libeller is not
competent to tnr alleged misconduct in the
Bovemment There are proper courts for
thatpu^posc. Parilamenl may enquire into

Trkdef Piter Pinerty

[JOOS

such a case. But no jury or court inferior to
parliament can inquire into it, at least in this
form. If there be any ground for accusation,
the party ought to proceed in the due course of
law* But be is not to calumniate the admi-
nistration of justice— the conduct of juries^
or judges, or the conduct of the king's go-
vernor, and to expect to put that jury, the
judges, or chief governor upon the defence
here, to prove the falsehood of the charge.

Therefore neither the truth nor falsehood
of the libellous matter is allowed here to be
enquired into. But you are to determine for
yourselves, upon the ground I have already
stated, whether or no this paper does male-
volently calumniate the proceedings had upon
that trial, and afterwards ; and if vou believe
it does, and that malice led to the publica-
tion of it, then you will of course find the
defendant guilty: but if you consider it a
fair, candid discussion of public affairs, not
with the intent I have mentioned, in that
case you will acdoit the prisoner. If you
have any rational aoubt, to oe sure, you will
acquit him. But if you are of opinion, that it
is a libel of that import which I have stated,
you ought to convict him.

Gentlemen, much has been said, and great
exertions were made, by counsel, to show
that the facts alleged in that libel were welt
founded. I have already stated, why I re-
jected the evidence offered. But it is said,
this is called in the indictment a faUe libel,
and therefore that it is matter of evidence
whether it be true or false. Gentlemen, that
is not the meaning of the term in the indict-
ment.— I have the same authority for saying,
that is not the meaning of the term ; nor will
it, though called/a^tf, make the truth or the
falsehood matter of enquiry. '* The epithet
Jake^ say the judges of England, in the
answer I have alluded to, *' is not applied ta
the propositions contained in the paper, but
to the aggregate criminal result— Libel. We
SSLY faltus libellut^ a false libel, as we say,
fainu prodUoTf a false traitor, in high treason.**
This is the highest authority in the law upon
this subject — and the same authority tells us,
that whether the epithet false be, or be not
used in the indictment, can make oe differ-
ence in respect of the materiality of the truth
or falsehood, or its being left to the jury upon
the trial.

Gentlemen, you will consider this ease,
and I am satisfied your verdict wili be coa«
formable to your duty.

*

The jury retired for a short time, and
brought in a verdict, Quilty.

SaUirda^!^ J)eeemh9r £3cd.

This day, Mf . Flnerly was put to the bar^
and before sentence. pronounced, begged per-
missioi^ to say a few words t6 the Court,

10093

ftr a Stdkiom LibeL

A. D. 1797.

[1010

which being- i^rantedy he proceeded as fol-
lows :♦

My lord; From the very able defence
which has been made for me, I should think
it utterly unnecessary to trouble your lord-
ship with anv observations of mine, if the
l^eua^e of Mr. Prime Serjeant, in his address
to the jury, had not imperiously demanded
acme reply.

It may accord well with the general system
of our government, to inflict a severe punish-
ment upon roe, but what end it can answer
to defame and abuse my character, I am at
a loss to discover. Among the epithets
which the learned counsel so liberally dealt
out agunst me, he was pleased to call me
*' the tool of a party." However humble I
nay be, my lordf, I should spurn the idea of
becoming the instrument of any party, or any
man; I was influenced solely oy my own
sense of the situation of the country, and
have uniformly acted from that feelmg of
patriotism which I hope it is not yet con-
sidered criminal to indulge; and I trust the
general conduct of thb Paess has fully
evinced to the people, that its object was
truth, and the goond of the nation, unconnected
with the views, or un warped by the prejudices
of any partv.

If I would stoop, my lord, to become the
tool of a party, I might have easily released
myself from prosecution, and enjoyed pro-
tection and reward; and this would have
been clearly illustrated, if your lordship had
suffered the persons summoned on my trial
to be examined.

I have been now, my lord, eight weeks in
close confinement, dunng which I have expe-
rienced the severest rigours of a gaol — the
offence was bailable, but it became impossible
for me, from the humility of my connections,
to procure bail to the amount demanded;
probablv had any person stood forward, he
would nave been marked; and sensible of
that, I preferred imprisonment to the expo-
sure of a friend to danger ; but not contented
with my imprisonment and persecution, it
seemed the intention of some of the agents
of government to render me infamous. For
this purpose, my lord, about three weeks
since I v^as taken from Newgate, which
ought at least to have been a place of security
to me, at seven o'clock in tne evening, by
what authority of law I know not, to alder^
man Alexander's office; and it was there
proposed to 'me to surrender the different
gentlemen who had favoured the Press with
their productions, particularly the author of
Marcut, Every artifice of hope and fear was
held out to me. After a variety of interro-
gations, and after detaining; me there until
two o'clock in the morning, i was despatched
to Kilmainham under an escort, where being
refused admittance, I was returned to New-

* This aocoutit of Mr. Finerty's Address to
the Court is Uken from ** The Press,'' No. 39.
VOL XXVI.

gate — from whence, about eleven o'clock on
the same day, I was again taken to alder-
man Alexander's, where I underwent a
similar scrutiny, until three o'clock, when the
alderman lefl roe, as he said, to go to secre-
tary Cooke, to know from him how he would
wish to dispose of me, or if he desired to ask
me anv questions. At eight in the evening,
the alderman, for whom I was obliged to
wait, was pleased to write to one of his
officers to have me remanded to prison. In
the course of this extraordinary inquisition,
my lord, I was threatened with a species of
punishment, to a man educated as I have
been in principles of virtue, and honesty, and
manlv pride, more terrible than death — a
punishment, my lord, which I am too proud
to name, and which, were it now to make
part of my sentence, I fear, although I hope
I am no coward, I should not be able to per-
suade myself to live to meet. By what au-
thority any man could presume to prejudge
your lordship's sentence, or anticipate the
verdict of a jury, it is not for me to decide. I
cannot conceive what sort of solicitude these
men entertain for the dignity of the Irish
character, or the honor of the government,
who thus endeavour to stain K by the multi-
plication of informers. It may be answered,
my lord, that informers are useful— so is the
office of common hangman ; but will any
man of common honesty, or common sense,
imitate the conduct, or plead for the character
of either, particularly in a time when so
many instances of profligacy have appeared
amonest that class ?

With respect to the publication, my lord,
which the jury has pronounced a libel, the
language of which is undoubtedly in sonae
instances exceptionable, it was received in
the letter-box by my clerk, who generally
went to the office earlier than I, and taking
it to the printing office, it was inserted, and
the whole impression of the paper worked off
before I saw it ; but on remonstrating with
the author, he produced to me such docu-
ments as put tne truth of the statement
beyond question, and these documents, mv
lord, were yesterday in court, and woiUJ,
combined with the testimony of the witnesses
present, if your lordship hau permitted their
examination, have amply satisfied the jury
of the facts ; and heretofore, mv lord, I have
been taught to think that truth was above
all things important, and I never did believe
it possible that truth and falsehood were in
any instance equally guilty, or that the tnith,
though it might not altogether acquit, would
not so much as extenuate, for if it would in
any degree extenuate- the offence, I suppose
your lordship wottid have thought it neces* •
sary that it should be heard, and of conse-
quence conceived the publication of Marcuses
letter not alone innocent but praiseworthy.
even though it did contain passages which t
do not vindicate ; but your lordship*s opinion^
and the verdict of the jury^ teaches a different

3 T

fWIJ 38 GEOBGEm.

ksson, and may sertfe to regulate my conduct
in future.

I hope your lordship will take the several
circumstances I have stated into considera-
tion—if euilt, my lord, consists in the mind,
I solemnly assure you, that I have examined
my heart, and find that it perfectly absolves
ine from any criminality of intention ; I have
only then to inform your lordship that a
heavy fine would be tantamount to perpetual
imprisonment, and long imprisonment little
short of death; ^^et whatever punishment
you may please to inflict, I trust I have suffi-
cient fortitude arising from my sense of re-
ligion, and of the sacred cause for which I
suffer, to enable me to bear it with resign
xiation.

Mr. Justice Downes, — Peter Finerty, you
have been found guilty by a jurj; of your
country of publishmg a most seditious libel.
The indictment, upon which you were tried,
charged you with publishing that libel, devis-
ing and intending to molest and disturb the
peace and public tranquillity of the kingdom,
and to bring a trial, a verdict, and the execu-
tion of a criminal, who had been tried and
executed in the due course of law, into con-
tempt, hatred, and scandal, among the king*s
subjects. It charees you with devising to
cause the king's subjeets to believe, that the
trial of William Orr, convicted at Carrick-
fereus, was unduly had, and that the criminal
undeservedly died, and that the lord lientenant
eught to have extended the king's mercy to
him, and did not, and that in not extending
Mich mercy, he acted unjustly, wickedly, in-
humanly^'and iroworthy of the trust commit^
ted to hmi. — With those intentions, the grand'
jurv charged that libel to have been published,
and with those intentions a petit jury of your
country have found that you did' publish it.

At the bar, you now speak of mnocence of
intention, and how ? — ^You have published a
]ibel upon the administration of justice, and
you say that you have done it innocently —
Ob your trial there was no evidence ei^en of
any circumstance in the act of publication
that could have made it- innocent. You state
from the bar, that it was put into your letter-
box—-that it was carried by a clerk to the
printing-office, and worked off without your
Knowing it. If those circumstances could
palliate your ofience, vou gave no evidence of
them ; and if you had, I tear they could have
availed but little. A printer is not tb scatter
poisons amone the people— he is not to scat-
ter arrows and death around him, and justify
himself by saying, that he did not attend to
business himself, but Mi it to his clerks : it
is no manner of justification, nor is there any
evidence to show that h so happened.

You speak of your intentions, and of your
attachment to the constitution. How are the
intentions of any man to be discovered but by
his acts ?— A jury has found you guilty of en-
deavouring to degrade the administratioii
of public justict—to disgrace the trial by jury

Trial of Pthr Pineriy

[fOI«

— to vilify the judges, and to traduce the go-
vernment of the countrjy* ; — they have found
you guilty of endeavouring by this libel to
make the public believe, that the administra-
tion of justice is nothing but oporession f5
them — that no mercy can be had rrom those
in whom the power of mercy is phiced. —
When your libel docs all this, wl|o shall be*
lieve tpat your intentions were not corres-
pondent to your acts, and that when you did
vilify and calumniate the administration of
justice and the government of the country^
who shall believe that you did not intend to
vilify and calumniate them P

You state, that your intentions were pore-
that documents were laid before you to prove'
the truth of the facts

Priioner. — Subsequent to the publication^
my lord.

Mr. Justice Downes. — Is a printer to try
the administration of the country upon what
he chooses to consider as documents? Is he
to excite the indignation of the people againsl-
their governors upon what you deem to be
sufficient documents P Are you to make
charees against the king's lieutenant — to ac-
cuse nim of criminality m his office, and to
shake the peace and happiness of the countnf
to its founaatien, and then to justify yourself
by alleging that your intentions were inno-
cent, ana that you supposed the documents in
your possession were sufficient, — sufficient fop
what? to justi^ you in vilifving the adminis-
tration of justice in all its branches, and ia>
every stage of its proceeding. It is impossi-
ble that the man utterine such an excuse caa>
feel that he can persoMe any man living to
believe it.

You have said, that offers of pardon were-
made to you— or of favour, on gtving up the
author of this libel, and vop have expressed'
an high degree of scorn at bemg desired to aic^
the public m discovering the original criminal;
You have, with a show of false spirit, affected'
to consider and to hold out to this audience,,
those men who assist in detecting crimes, as
criminal themselves—- a false sentiment which
I trust no man can adopt.

What ofiers were made you, I know not ;
none appeared to the Court. If any were
made^ they were probably the dictates of a*
merciful dtspositiou; ^nd yetyourlibel states
that mercy has no existence in the govern-
ment of this country. I do not-ilhd any cir-
cumstance stated by you at the bar in mitiga-
tion of your punishment that can warrant me
in letting it affisct the judgment of the Court,
other than one fact, that you have been in
prison for eight weeks. That fact, so far aait
goes, will be taken into consideration. an<f
Uic imprisonment X shall order, wi^ be
directed to be computed from the time when
you were first arrested. So far as that goes,,
and that apoears the only circumstance tha;t
can in any aegree tend to any sort of mitiga-
tion, you shall have the benefit of it. You
have been found guilty by a jury of the &ct.

JOll]

foruSidiH^iu

A. D. 1797.

[1014

which ywt now admit at the bar^of publishiitt
• libely which attacks the very existence of
aociely, by endeavouring to draw into con-
tempt the administration of justice. It is
obvious to every man, that if you, or the
writer of this libel should be able to persuade
the peoplei that Justice b not duly adminis-
tered to thetn, there can be no happiness, no
peace in the country; vou have vilified the
trial by jury — ^that mode of trial, fer which
4Mir ancestors and ourselves have been at all
times the admiration of the world. You
have represented tiie execution of a criminal
in the due and ordinary course of justice, as
«n horrid murder, perpetmted by corrupt per-
jury in the witnesses, and drunkenness in the
iuryl— Can any man doubt of the wicked
tendency of such an accusation, or of the in-
tentions of those by whom it is made? You
have by this libel ^uther represented, that a
man, whose conviction you state to have been
so obtained, has hpea suffered by the lord
lieutenant to be executed, he actually know-
ing his innocence ! — Is it possible to state a
-charge of a more atrocious nature ?«>Is it pos-
sible to conceive that any man, much less a
man in his high station, woukl be so deaf to
the calls of justice, so steeled against every
honest and honourable feelings aa knowinglv
to suffer an innocent man to be put to death
by form of law ?— It b an atrocity beyond all
tmasination ! — It is impossible to Mieve It
—No man^ not even the writer of that libol,
does, or can believe it. Your libel equally
attacks the conduct and character of the judge
who tried the criminal; for it represents to
Che public, that this man has been executed
4ipen A verdict obtained by drunkenness, re-
ward, and perjury. Can it be supposed, or is
there any man acquainted with the proceed^
ings in criminal courts who can believe, that
if the verdk;t were so obtained^ tlie judge
would not have recommended the prisoner to
mercy ? And if the judge had recommended
to mercy, has it ever been heard bv any man
living, that mercy was ever refused to such a
recommendation r — Is there a mwB, who ever
heard, that a iudge who tried a prisoner, had
recommended him to the lord lieutenant for
pardon, and that pardon was refused ? — never;
no judge ever yet recommended a prisoner
for mercy, where mercy was refused by the
present or anv other chief governor of thb
country. In the instance of Orr, ample time
was given by three difierent respites to exa-
mine into nb case. If the learned jud^
who tried the prisoner, had thought it const»-
tent with his duty to recommend him, there
is no man in his situation who would not
have recommended— -the learned judge would
have felt peculiar delight in recommending to
mercy, if he thought it consistent with his
duty ; and if he h& recommended, there is
no man can believe that his recommendation
would have been refused. Mercy never b
refused in any instancy lybere it ought to be
extended; and to extend ^it where it ought
notj b cruelty to the public.

I have thus adverted to the general course
which your libel has taken, if it has been
successful enough to convince any one man,
that such an atrocity as k alleges was com*
milted, and that the administratbn of justice
is in the state that your libel represents, that
man is a worse subieet than lie was before ;
and if the body of the people can be per-
suaded to believe such a representation, it
would tend to destroy the whole frame of our
constitution, and the peace and happiness of
society. But your libel, not content with re*
viling the adminbtration of justice, has had
the audacity to attack the law of the land,
and to justify the crime for which Orr was
convicted; and even putting it, as the libel
does, upon the supposition that the verdict
was true, and the proceedings in the due and
ordinary course this libel affirms, that the
crime of which Orr was convicted was no
offence — that it was an act innocent, even
meritork>u8--and what was that act?— The
adminbtering an nnlawful oath of that de«
soription from whence every evil which this
country now dej^ores has arisen— an oath
purporting to bind men to be of a society
formed for seditious purposes — ^an oath l^
which the person taking it, surrenders hb
liberty to the control of others, of whom he
knows nothing— an oath to be of a society.^
appearing, in abundant instances in evidence
upon judicial trials, to have been formed for
the destruction of the government and of the
country, and to aid the common enemy of the
empire. From that oath have sprung innu-
merable robberies, the most atrocious cruel-
ties, horrid conspiracies to murder— murder
the most savage and barbarous, and treasons
which threaten to shake the state— > these
have been the fruits of that oath which your
libel justifies, and calls an oath of CAart<v, of

UnioHf of Humanity^ and of Ftuce / ^There

stand behind you, at thb moment, many un-
happy men, waiting the dreadful sentence of
the law, which that oath has provoked against
them, and who halve by that oath surrendered
their free will, and have given up the guid-
ance of their actions to desperate men, and
under thcnr influence, committed crimes of
which before they had no Conception.

And yet this b the offence wnich thb libel
not only odls innocent, but even|merttorious!
—When a libel has all this horrid tendency
which I feel thb has, and which every think-
ing man must observe, must be convmced of,
it does call upon the Court for a severe pu-
nishment, and it b mv duty to pronounce
that sentence, whkh the law does enforce,
and wUch it does not become me toallevmte.

That sentence b. that you do stand in and
upon the pillory for the space of one hour— -
that you be imprisoned for two years to be
computed from thedlstday of October^ 1797,*
and until you pay a fine of 30/. to the king—

* The day upon which the prisooer was
arrested*

1015] 38 GEORGE III.

anil that you give security for ypur future I
good behaviour for seven years from the end
of your imprisonment, yourself in 500l. and
two sureties in S50/. each.

Trial qfPeier Fmerty

[1016

[The following articles were published in
the fortieth number of" The Press" on Satur-
day, December 30, 1797.

To THE Irish Nation.

Countrymen ; since the conviction and
sentence passed on the printer of" The Press,"
a clause has been pointed out by the commis-
sioners of stamps, which lay lurking in one
of the late parliament's acts, unknown to the
lawvers; whereby a printer convicted of a
libel, shall be deprived of his property in the

1>aper in which it had been inserted. By this
aw, in such perfect conformity with all other
acts of parliament, which in the words of a
sreat and a good man, " has taken more from
tne liberties, and added more to the burthens
of the people" — and I may sav stained the
statute book with more penal laws " than
any ptirliament that ever yet existed ;" it has
become necessary that on the spur of the
instant, from this unforeseen clause, another
ppopnetor should come forward to save the
Irisn Press from being put down. To perform
that sacred office to this best benefactor of
mankind, has devolved upon me ; and rest
assured I will discharge it with fidelity to
you and our country, until some one more
versed in the business can be procured. —
Every engine of force and corruption has
been employed by these ministers, into whose
hands unfortunately for the present peace,
and the future repose of the nation, unlimited

FDwer has been invested, to discover whether
wastheproprietorof'^ The Press." Had they
sent to me, mstead of lavishing your money
amongst perjurors, spies, ana mformers, I
woulahave told them, what now I tell you ; I
did setup "The Press," though ina legal sense
I was not the proprietor ; nor did I look to
any remuneration ; and I did so, because from
the time that, in violation of property, in
subversion of even the appearance of respect
for the laws, and to destrov not only the free-
dom of the press, but " The Press" itself, the
present ministers demolished the Northern
Star; no paper in Ireland, either from beine
bought up, or from the dread and horror of
being destroyed, would publish an account of
the enormities which these very ministers had
been committing ; where they not only suf-
fered a lawless oanditti of sworn extirpators
to destroy the property, to raze the habita^
tions, and to drive thousands of ruined fami-
lies to the most distant parts of the country,
for want of protection, and where the strongest
suspicions rested, that they had given encou-
ragement to such diabolical acts, under the
name of loyalty, and the mask of religion ;
where they let j loose an| ejrciYed soldiery, to
commitacts of outrage which po ipvadingarmy
of aijy country in Europe^ would^havc prac-

tised, without violating those laws established
amongst civilized nations, where the torch
had consumed their houses and property ia
entire districts, and summary muraers had
been wantonly perpetrated ; where thousands
have been humed into those multiplied dun-
geons, and thousands sent to the gallows, on
" suspicion qf being suspected/* of Reform
and Union ; and above all, where Torturb
has been applied in numerous instances to
extort confession,' of what by the Insurrection
act has been judged worthy of death; but as I
read it, by the strictest rules and injunctions
of Christian morality has been enforced as a
paramount duty. ** That Torture" which
our ancestors held in such inveterate abhor-
rence, that its utter exclusion was esteemed so
fundamental a part of our constitutional code,
that neither that Stuart, nor bis ministers
whose heads paid the forfeit of the crimes
they committed, nor the ministers of that
Stuart who was expelled, durst introduce it.
I could cite myriaas of facts to substantiate
the suppression of the publication of these
enormous atrocities ; but I will confine myself
to the mention of one, which has come within
my own knowledge. Whilst I was confined
in the Tower, the soldiers who were stationed
all around it, fired up at the prison, and on
being asked why they had fired, without
having challen^, or any pretext for so
doing, thejr answered,^'' thai they had acted
** according to the orders thejf got.** As I was
the only person confined in the prison, no
doubt could remain that these orders were
issu^ed for the purpose of assassination. A
gentleman who had been an eye-witness of
the attempt, took a statement of facts to the
Evening Post, which was at that time esteemed
the least corrupted paper in Dublin ; but the
editor told him, that fearinjg that his bouse
and his press might experience the fate of
the Northern Star,* he would not insert it;
although the next day not only that print,
but every other paper in town, contained an
account of the transaction ; in which there
was not one word of truth except the admis-
sion that the shots had been fired ! From the
moment I was enlarsed from the Tower, I
determined to free " iXe Press" from this das-
tardly thraldom, that the conduct of those
ministers might be futhfuUy published ; and
whilst a beloved brother is confined in a cell
nine feet square, against every form* of law^
and the plighted faith of this administration,
I take this opportunity to call on lord Camden
to tell you and the world, wliat inquiry has
been made, or what punishment has been in-
flicted on the perpetrators of an act^ which if
brought home to his administration, must

* This paper, ^ instituted at Belfast in the
" summer of 1797, was not suppressed othcr-
^ wise than simply by an act of military exe-
** cution ; a party of soldiers taking possession
" of the pnn ting-office, and destroying the
" iy^es:' Gordon's Hist. Irish Rebellion, 3?* •

1017]

fir u SedUiaiu Libel.

A. D. 1797.

[1018

affix a greater sUun on bis name, than the
ever memorable days of September have in**
delibly left on Robiespierre and his gang of
assassins ; whose government was supported
by burnif^g of Acnuei , destruction of property^
moMtacreing the people^ and crowding the gal-
leyt and dungeons^ but for which he, evxn
KoBESPiEaRB, disduned to employ torture to
extort confessions of patriotisray which this
sanguinary usurper punished as treason.
Whenever it shaU happen that one or a few
base usurpers, shall have seized on a nation's
civil and political rights ; and that they shall
have sold them to a neighbouring country, in
the rankest and foulest corruption and trea-
son ; whenever it shall happen that to heal
relieioHs dissention, to promote universal
]>hilanthropy, true christian charity, and na-
tional union ; and to establish the imprescrip-
tible right of beine represented, which no
people can forfeit, wall be punished by law-
less or legalised murder; trust me, the most
drowsy conscience, stung b;^ public exposure,
will make every effort by briMrv, bv violence,
by persecution, and even by bludgeon and
robbery, to put down'' The Press.** Butregard-
ing it as the great luminary which has dis-

Selled the danuiess in which mankind lay
rutalized, in ignorance, superstition, and
slavery,— resardins it as that bright constella-
tion which, by its difiusion of light, is at this
moment restoring the nations amongst whom
it has made its appearance to knowledge and
freedom ; whilst 1 can find one single plank
of tiie scattered rights of my country to stand
on, I will fix my eyes on " The Press," as the
polar star which is to direct us to the haven
of fireedom. With these sentiments en-
graved on my heart; alive to the honest
ambition of serving my country ; regardless
whether I am doomed to fall by the lingering
torture of a solitary dungeon, or the blow of
the assassin ; if the freedom of the Press is
to be destroyed, I shall esteem it a proud
destinv to be buried under its ruins. But if
there be any men so base or so stupid as to
imagine that they can usurp or withnold your
civil and political rights; that they can con-
vert truth into semtion, or patriotism into
treason ; if they imagine that this is a period
favourable for abridging the freedom of man-
kind, or establishing oespotic power on the
ruins of liberty, let them look round them,
and they will find, that amongst the old
and inveterate despotisms in Europe, some
have been destroyed, and that the rest are
en the brink of destruction. They may
make martyrs, and liberty's roots will be fer-
tilized by the blood of the murdered ; but if
their deeds and their blunders have not made
reflexion a horror, let them look back on the
five years that are passed, and they will see
that they have been the most destructively
rapid revolutionists that ever existed ; they will
see that Great Britain and Ireland, from the
portion of rights they enjoyed, which were
the nations of Europe where revolution was
least necessary, and where it might have

been most easily saved, are now nearest -the
danger. But let them reflect pre it is too
late, and it is never too late to abandon a
ruinous course, that if they could establish
without opposition Uttret de eachette in place
of Habeas Corpus, and trial by jury ; if the
galleys and bastiles of despotism could be
erected in place of the orisons of law ; if they
could abolish every iaea of representation,
and establish chambers for registering their
requisitions and edicts; if instead of the
Press of the Nation they could set up the
Gazette of the Court; if they could abolish
that great constitutional principle^ that no
man could be forced to his own cnmination,
and establish the torture to extort confession ;
they should recollect that, like France, in-
stead of preventing a revolution, they would
but create so many powerful causes to excite
the people to make one ; and whilst tyrannic
despots talk so much of supporting the con-
stitution they have done so much to destroy^
let them remember that if it owes much to
obedience^ it owes more to resistance; and
that the feelings of a people must determine
where crimes and suifenngs shall end the
one and begin the other.

Artbvr CCoirvoa.*

This day Mr. Peter Finerty, pursuant to
his sentence, stood one hour in the pillory^
opposite to the Sessions-house in Green-
street. An immense concourse of people at-
tended this exhibition. Mr. Finerty was ac-
companied by some most respectable citi-
zens ; he appeared contented and resigned,
and upon.bemg released from the restramt of
this governmental engine for securing the ti^
bertyofthe Press, he addressed the spectators
in a few words : ** My friends, you see how
** cheerfully I can suffer — ^I can suffer any
** thing, provided it promotes the liberty of
'' my country.*' Upon this the spectators
applauded by clapping of hands, the most
marked silence having prevailed until then.
Some of the ^uard who attended, being, we
suppose, the picked men of the Armagh militia,
attacked the unarmed people. Some of the
officers also were guilty oi similar .conduct;
others both officers and privates acted like
gentlemen and soldiers. Sheriff Pasley on
this occasion conducted himself with perfect
propriety. The conduct of the people was
peaceable and exemplary.

Mr. Finerty has received the sentence of
the Law for publishing what he offered in
open court to prove was the Truth. He has
by this sentence been deprived not only of
liberty, but of bread. The friends of the
Press and of Truth, are hereby informed
that subscriptions will be received for his
relief at the Press-office, and the names of
his benefactors, if required, kept secret, lest
virtue, public spirit, and benevolence should
subject any to violence or persecution.]

* See his trial for high'treasoU; a. d. 1798^
infrd^

1019] M GEORGE III.

Trial off^airidt Finney

[lOfO

62&. Proceedings on the Trial of Patuck Finn^t for High
Treason; tried at Dublin before the Right Honourable
Tankerville Chamberlain, one of the Justices of the Court
of King s Bench, and the Honourable Michael Smith, one
of the Barons of the Court of Exchequer of the Kingdom
of Ireland, on Tuesday January 16th: 38 Georoe UI.
A. D. 1798.*

AT s Commission of Oytt and Teiminer
held in the chy of Dublin, in the month of
July, 1797, an indictment was found against
the nrisoner, Patrick Finney, for high treason,
at which time counsel and an agent were as-
signed to him.

At the ensuing commission held in the
month of October following, he was ordered
to be brought into court in order lo be arraign-
ed, when Uie noler mentioned, that the pri-
soner ¥ras confined to his bed by illness.

The Court directed, that the physician who
attended the gaol should examme the priso-
ner, and report the state of bis health on the
next day.

Doctor Scott accordingly appeared in court
the next day, and was exammed upon oath
touching the prisoner's state of health. He
stated tnat the prisoner had been attacked
with a slight fever, which was then subsided,
and his pulse was tolerably regular : — he ap-
prehended that the prisoner's illness arose
from something he had taken; and upon be-
ing asked, whether he thought the prisoner
was in such a state of health, as to admit of
his being broueht into court, and remainine
there during a long trial ; the doctor answered
that in his opinion he was not

In consequence of this report, the prisoner
was not brought into court, until the next ad-
journment ofthe commission, which was upon
Monday the llth of December. 1797, when
he was aVraigned upon tlie following indict-
ment:

%»/ '*^ ^y \ The jurors for our lord
^Dublin to mt. ^^^^ ,,|„g upon their oath

present that an open and public war on tbe
SOth day of Apnl in the 37 th Vear of the
reign of our lord George the third by the
jrace of God of Great Bntain France and Ire-
mnd king defender of the faith and soforth
and lone before and ever since hitherto by
land and by sea. was and yet is carried on
and prosecuted by the persons exercising the
powers of government m France against our
most serene illustrious and excellent prince

* Reported by William Ridgeway, esq.
Barrister at Law. o ^ --j

our said lord the now king And that Patrick
Finney late of thenarisbof St. Andrew in
thecity of Dublin tobacco spinner a subject
of our said lord the king of his kinadom of
Ireland well knowing the premises out not
having the fear of God in his heart nor weigh-
ing the duty of his allegiance but beine moved
and seduced by the instigation of tne devil
as a false traitor against our said lord the now
kine his supreme true lawful and undoubted
lord the cordial love and true and due obedi-
ence which every true and dutiful subject of
our said present sovereign lord th^ king to-
wards him onr said lord the kin^ shoulabear
wholly withdrawing and contrividg and with
all his strength intending the peace and com-
mon tranquulity of this Kin£;aom of Ireland
to disquiet molest and disturo and the govern-
ment of our said sovereign lord the king from
the royal state title honour power crown and
imperial government of this his kingdom df
Ireland to depose and deprive and our said
lord the king to death and final destruction
to bring.

And that the said Patrick Finn^ on the
said SOth day of April in the said 37 th year
of the reign of our said lord the kins and on
divers other days and times as well before as
after that day, at the parish of St. Andrew
aforesaid in the city ofDublin aforesaid and
in the county of the said city ofDublin with
force and arms ^Is^Iy wickedly and traitor-
ously did compass imagine and intend the
said lord the king then and there his supreme
true and lawful lord of and from the rojrai
state title honor power crown* and imperial

Government of diis his realm of Ireland to
eposc and wholly deprive and the said lord
the king to kill and bring and put to death
and that to fulfil and bting to effect his said
most evil wicked treason and treasonable ima-

finations and compassings he the said Patrick
inney as such false trdtor as aforesaid dur-
ing the said war between our said lord the
king and the said persons exercising the pow-
ers of government in France on the said 3oth
day ofApril in the 37tb year of the reign of
our said lord the king au)resaid at the parish
of St. Andrew afbresaid in the city and county
of the said city ofDublin afbresaid with force

1021]

fir High Treastnu

A. D. 1798.

[1028

snd arms falsely tvmlicioiisljr and traitorously
did join unite and associate himself to and
with divers other false tnutors to the jurors
aforeaaiid as yet unknown ; and did then and
there with such false traitors to the jurors
aforesaid unknown enter into and become
one of ftfuirty and society formed and associ-
ated under the denomination of United Irish-
men, with design and for the purpose of aid-
ing and assisting the said persons so exercis-
ing the powers of government in France and
80 waging war as aforesaid against our said
aoverei^ lord the now kin^ in case they
should mvade or cause to be invaded this his
kingdom of Ireland and being so united and
associated did then and there and at divers
other days and times as well before as afler
diat day with divers other false traitors to
the jurors aforesaid unknown meet assemble
confer consult and deliberate on the adhering
to joining aiding and assisting the said per-
sons so exercismg the power of government
in France as aforesaid and being enemies of
our said lord the king as aforesaid in case
they should invade or cause to be invaded
this his kingdom of Ireland.

And that afterwards and during the said
war on the SOth day of April in the d7th
year of the reign of our said lord the king
aforesaid at the parish of St. Andrew afore-
said in the city and county of the city of
Dublin aforesaid the said Patrick Finney as
such false traitor as aforesaid i» farther pro-
secution of his treason and traitorous purposes
with force and arras falsely maliciously and
traitorously did join unite and associate him-
self to and with divers other false traitors to
tlie jurors aforesaid as yet unknown and did
then and there with such false traitors to the
Jurors aforesaid unknown enter into and be*
come one ofaparty and society formed and
associated under the denomination of IJnttad
Irishmen with design and for the purpose of
Aiding assisting and adhering to the said per-
sons so exercising the power of jgovemment
in France and so waging war against our said
^verei^ lord the now king in case they
should invade or (^ause to be invaded this his
kingdom of Ireland.

And that afterwards and during the sai^'
war 5rc. on the SOth day of April in the S7th
year of the rei^ aforesaid and on divers
other days and times &c. at the parish of St.
Andrew aforesaid in the city and county of
the city of Dublin aforesaid the said Patrick
Unney as such false traitor as aforesaid &c.
with force and arms falsely wickedly and
traitorously did with divers other false traitors
whose names are to the said jurors unknown
meet propose consult conspire confederate
and agree that one or more person or persons
should be sent into France to incite move and
persuade the said persons exercising the
powers of government in France and oeing
enemies or otrr said lord the king to invade
this kingdom of Ireland and to raise and make
war therein against our said lord the king.

X

And that af^rwards and during the said
war between our said lord the king and the
smd persons &c. to wit on the SOth day of
April in the S7th year of the reign aforesaid
at the parish of St. Andrew aforesaid in the
city and county of the city of Dublin afore*
said the said Patrick Finney as such false
traitor as aforesaid in farther prosecution of
his said treason and treasonable purposes
with force and arms falsely wickedly and
traitorously did with divers other false traitor*
whose names are to the said jurors unknown
meet propose consult conspire confederate and
agree that one or more person or persona
should be sent into France to invite move
and persuade the said persons exercising the
powers of government in France and so beinr
enemies of our said lord the king as aforesaid
to invade this kingdom of Irelaiul and to raise
and make war therein against our said lord
the king and the said Patrick Finuey then
and there did ask demand raise levy and re-
ceive from the said other false traitors so
then and there met together diverl sums of
money to wit from each and every of the
said false traitors the sum of 90/. in order and
for the purpose thereby and therewith to
pay discmirge and defray the costs chargee
and exp^nces of the said person or persons so
to be sent into France for the said purpose
last mentioned in going and travelMogby land
and by water into France for the said purpose
in manner last herein before mentioned.

And that afkrwards, &c. on SOth day of
April S7th year &c. at the parish of St.
Andrew aforesaid in the city and county of
the city of Dublin aforesaid the said Patrick
Finney as such false traitor as aforesaid m
further prosecution of his said treason and
treasonable purposes aforesaid with force and
arms falsely wickedly and traitorously did witb
divers other false traitors whose names are te
the said jurors unknown meet propose consult
conspire confederate and a^ree to send and
in pursuance of said conspiracy and agree*
ment then and there did send into Fnmce
four persons to the said jurors unknown to
incite moye and persuade the said persona
exercising the powers of government in
France and being enemies of our said lord
the king to invfule this kingdom of Ireland
and to raise and make war therein gainst
our said lord the king and to aid and assist
the said persons exercising the powers of
government in France and being enemies of
our said lord the king in invading this king**
dom of Ireland and in raising and making
war therein against our said lora the king.

And that afterwards &c. to wit on the SOlh
daiy of April in the S7th year of the reig*
aforesaid at the parish of St. Andrew- afore«
said in the city and county of the city of
Dublin aforesaid the said Patrick Finney as
such fklse traitor as aforesaid in further prose-
cution of his said treason and treasonable pur*
poses with force and arras falsely wickedly and
traitorously did with div^ other fidse traitors

1033J S8 GEORGE IIL

whose names are to the said jurors as yet ua-
koown propose consult confederate and agree
to send and in pursuance of the said conspiracy
and agreement then and there did send into
France four persons to the said jurors un-
known to incite move and persuade the said
persons exercising the powers of government
in France and bemg enemies of our said lord
the king to invade this kingdom of Ireland
and to raise and make war therein against
our said lord the king and to aid and assist
the said persons so exercisinj; the powers of
government in France and bemg enemies of
our said lord the king in invading this king-
dom of Ireland and raisine and makine war
therein a^inst our said lord the king and the
said Patrick Finney then and there did ask
demand raise levy and receive from the said
other false traitors so then and there met to-
gether divers sums of money to wit from each
and every of the said false traitors the sum of
SO/ in order and for the purpose therewith
and thereby to pay discharge and defray the
costs charges and expenses of the said four
persons to tlie jurors unknown in going and
travelling by land and by water into ^ance
for the said purposes last mentioned in manner
last herein*Demre mentioned

And afterwards &c to wit on the 7th day
of May in the S7th year of the reign of 'Our
said lord the kin^ ^c at the parish of St
Andrew aforesaid m the city and county of
the city of Dublin aforesaid the said Patrick
Finney as such false traitor as aforesaid in
further persecution of his treason and treason-
able purposes with force and arms falsely
wickedly and traitorously did with divers
other false traitors whose names are to the
said jurors unknown meet propose conspire
consult and . cx>nfederate to raise levy and
make insurrection rebellion and war within
this kingdom of Ireland

And that afterwards and during; the said
war &c to wit on the 7 th day of May in the
37th year of our said lord the king at the
parish of St Andrew aforesaid in the city and
county of the city of Dublin aforesaid the said
. Patrick Finney as such false traitor as afore-
said in further prosecution of his sakl treason
and treasonable purposes with force and arms
falsely wickedly and traitorously did join and
associate himself to and with divers other
false traitors whose names are to the jurors
unknown and did then and there with such
false traitors to the jurors aforesaid unknown
enter in to and become one of a party and
society formed and associated under the deno-
mination of United Irishmen with design and
fot the end and purpose of aiding assisting
and adhering to the persons exercising the
powers of government in France and so
waging war as aforesaid against our said lord
the now king in case they should invade or
cause to be invaded this his kingdom of
Ireland and the said Patrick Finney and the
said other false traitors to the jurors unknown
i|vbo were then and there present together

Tritd qfPatri^ Fitmey

[1^4

and so associated and united and there
amounting in the whole to the number of
forty-eight persons did then and there divide
themselves into four splits each of which said
splits contained twelve of the said false
traitors and each of the said splits did then
and there choose one of the said members
thereof to be the secretary of such split and to
meet consult and confederate on behalf of
such split with divers other false traitors to
the sain jurors unknown at a meeting of the
said false traitors last mentioned to oe held
at the parish of St Andrew in the city and
county of the city of Dublin under the deno-
mination of a Baronial Meeting for the afore-
said purpose of aiding assisting and adhering
to the said persons exercising the powers of
government in France and so waging war as
aforesaid against our sdd lord the now king
in case they should invade or cause to be
invaded this his kingdom of Ireland and after
that the said secretaries were so chosen the
said Patrick Finney with the other fjUse
traitors who were then and there present as
aforesaid did then and there consult confede"
rate and conspire to make and cause to be
made a forcible and violent attack on his
majesty's ordnance stores in his' majesty's
castle of Dublin in the city and county of Uie
city of Dublin in which said stores his majes-
ty's arms and ammunition for the use of his
majesty's troops in this kingdom then were
and usually ^ kept in order thereby forcibly
and violently to aeprive his majesty of the
said stores and of the arms and ammunition
therein contained and the said Patrick Finney
in order to promote assist and facilitate the
success of the said attack did then and there
advise direct and command the said false
traitors then and there present that they and
each and every of them should view WhiteV
court in Great Ship-street No. 48 in Great
George's- street and the stone-cutter's vard m
said street last mentioned and should give
their opinion to their respective splits (mean-
ing the splits aforesaid) whether said places
were proper places to make an attack on the
said ordnance stores so as their secretaries
(meaning the secretaries aforesaid) might be
enabled to report their opinion to the Baronial
Meetings (meaning the meeting so to be held
as aforesaid under the denominatioaof a Baro-
nial Rleeting.)

And that afterwards and during the said
war between our said lord the king and the
said persons exercising the powers of govern-
ment in France to wit on the 7th day of May
in the 37th year of our said lord the king at
the parish of St. Andrew aforessud in the city
and county of the said city of Dublin aforesaid
the said Patrick Finney as such false traitor
as aforesaid in further prosecution of said
treason and treasonable purposes with force
and arms falsely wickedly and traitorously
did join unite and associate himself to and
with divers other false traitors whose narae^
are to the said jurors unknown and did tbett

10851

f<^ High Treason*

A. D. 1798.

[I08S

and there with such &Iie traitors to the
jurors unknown enter into and become one of
a party and society formed and associated
under the denomination of United Irishmen
with design and for the end and purpose of
aiding and assisting and adhering to the said
persons exercising the goTemment in France
and so ¥raging war as aforesaid against our
said lord the now king in case they should in-
vade or cause to be invaded this his kingdom
of Irelami And the said Patrick Finney and
the said other false traitors to the jurors un-
known who were then and there present
together and so associated and united and
there amountine in the whole to the number
of 48 persons did then and there divide them-
selves in 4 splits each of which said splits
contained IS of the said false traitors and
each of the said splits did then and there choose
one of the saia members thereof to be the
secretary of such split and to meet consult
and confederate on behalf of such split with
divers other &lse traitors to the jurors un-
known at a meeting of the said false traitors
last mentioned tol^ held at the parish of St«
Andrew in the said city and county of the
ci\y of Dublin under the denomination of a
Baronial Meeting for the aforesaid purpose of
aiding assisting and adhering to the said
persons exercismg the powers of government
in France and so waging war as aforesaid
against our said lord. the now king in case
they should invade or cause to be invaded this
bis kingdom of Ireland and after that the said
secretanes were so chosen the sdd Patrick
Finney with the other &lse traitors who were
then and there present as aforesaid did then
and there eoosiut confederate and anee that
a forcible and violent attack should oe made
by divers false traitors to the jurors unknown
on his majesty's ordnance stores in his ma-
jesty's castle of Dublin in the city and county
of the dty of Dublin in which said stores hb
miyesly's arms and ammunition for the use of
his majesty's troops in this kingdom
then were and usually are kept, in order that
thereby his said majesty should be forcibly
and violently deprived of the said stores and
of the said arms and ammunition therein
contained.

And the said Patrick Finney and the said
other false traitors who were then and there
present as aforesaid in order to promote as-
sist and facilitate the success of^ the said at-
tack did then and there conspire confederate
and agree that they and each and every of
them should view VV^hite's-court in Great Ship-
street the house and concerns at No. 48
Great George's-street and the stone-cutter's
yard in the said street last mentioned and
should give their opinions to the respective
splits aforesaid whetner said places were pro-
per places to make an attack on the said ord-
nance stores so as that their secretaries afore-
said might be enabled to report their opinion
to the fiiaronial meeting aforesaid.

And that afterwards and during the said
* VOL. XXVI.

war between the said lord the king and said
persons so exercising tlie powers of govern-
ment in France to wit on the 82nd day of
Mav in the said d7th year of the reign of our
said lord the king and on divers other days
as well before as after that da3r at the parish
of St Andrew aforesaid in the city and county
of the city of Dublin aforesaid the said Pa-
trick Finney as such false traitor as aforesaid
in farther prosecution of his said treason and
treasonable purposes with force and arms
falsely wickedly and traitorously did with,
divers other false tndtors whose names are to
the said iurors unknown meet assemble con-
sult conspire and agree to cause procure and
incite the said persons exercising the powers
of government m France being enemies of our
said lord the king as aforesaio to invade this
kingdom of Ireland with ships aikl armed men
anoto carry on the said war agunst the said-
lord the king in this his kingdom of Ireland.

And that afterwards and during the said
war between our said lord the king and the
said persons exercinn|; the powers of govern-
ment in France to wit on the 80th da^ of
Mav in the said 87 th year of the rcien of'^our
said lord the king and on divers otner days
and times as well before as after that day at
the parish of St Andrew aforesaid in the city
and county of the city of Dublin aforesaid m
farther prosecution of his said treason and
treasonable purposes the said Patrick Finney
as such false traitor as aforesaid with force
and arms falsely wickedly and traitorously did
with divers other false trdtors whose names
are to the said jiut>rs unknown meet propose
consult conspire confederate and agree to raise
levy and make insurrection rebellion and waf
within the kln^om of Ireland agdnst our
said lord the king in case the stdd person so
exercising the powers of government m France
should invade or cause to be invaded this his
kinedom of Ireland or that part of hi» kingdom?
of Great Britun caUed England.

And that afWrwaids and during the said
war between our said k>rd the king and the
persons exercising the powers of eovemment
m France to wit on the saki SOth dmr of May
in the said 87th year of the reign of our said
lord the kins and on divers other days as well
before as after the said day at the parish of
St. Andrew aforesaid in the city and county
of the city of Dublin aforeswd in farther pro-
secution of his said treason and treasonable
purposes with force and arms falsely wickedly
and traitorously did with divers other false
traitors whose names are to the sud jurors on*
* known meet propose consult conspire confe-*
derate and asree to raise levy and make inr
surrection reDellion and war within this king-
dom of Ireland aeainst our said lord the king^
in case the said persons so exercising the
powers of government in France should in-
vade or cause to be invaded this his kingdom
of Ireland.

And that afterwards and during the said
war between our said lord the king and the

8 U

1027] 38 GEOEGS: UL

said persons exerciskigthe po were of govern*
meat in France to wit on the said 30th'
day of May in the STth vear of the reign of
our said lord the king and ondiYeii otber days
as well before as after the said day- at the p»-
risb of St Andrew aforesaid in tne city and
eounty of the city of Dublin a^etaid ttte said
Patrick Finney as such false traitor aS' afore-
saad in farther prosecution of his'said< treason
and treascmabie purposes with foroe and^arms
falsely wickedly and' traatorously did with
divers other fUse traitors whose names are to
the said jurar9 unknown meet |m>p08e consult
conspire ooDfederato and agree to aid and as-
sist encoura^ and> support the said persons'
so exercising the powers of ' govemraent' is
France as aforesaid and being enemies of our
said lord the king as aforesaid' in case they
should invade or cause to be invaded this his'
kingdom of Iceland with ships and'armed'men
against the duty of the allegiance of him the
said Patrick Finney against the peace of onr
said lord the king his crown aiM dignity and'
against the form of ttoe statute in' that case
made and provided.

There was a second count charging the
prisoner witli adhering to the king's enemies,
and the same overt acts were laid' as- in tl>e
first count.

The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty.

.And he was ordered to be ready for liis
trial^ lipon Wednesday the ISthk

Trial of Pairick Finurg

[tOM

Wednesday^ Doeember tSthi

llie prisoner was put to the bar, and beings
a^ked was he ready for his trial? said. he was
npt.

He then Uiadeanaffidavit^ statlng-^'^Tbat
Airthiir Roberts, esq., of 8lfadbai^j in* the
Queen's county, was a matenal witness: that
a crown summons issMcd direotedtO'hini) re-
quiring his attendance on the lltb of Decern*
ber, instant. That deponent was infoimed
and believed, that a copy of' said summons
was served upon said Ktoberts, personally, at<
his dwelling house in Stradbally, on Salufday
laet, at eleven o'clock in the niomine. That
deponent caused diligent search and inquiry
to bie made through- the city of Dublin, at
several places usually frequented by saiid Ro>-
bferti when in town, and deponentrwas in^
formed and believed he could not be found,
and did not attend*; saith he will use his ut-
most endeavours and hones, and expects to
procure the attendance or said Roberts^ dar-
ing the present commission or at the next
commissfon of Oyer aud- Terminer, and cany
not with safety to his life abide his trial with«
Out the benefit of the testimony of said Ro>
berts."

Peter Leech made an affidavit, stating —
'^'That he served the summons upon Mr. Ro-
berts^ Saturday the 9th instant; that Roberts

infbrmed him he was then unwell; batvmiiulily
if he vms' able, come to tiownand attiiAdi; that*
deponent made diligent seareh in* seweml*
phices where he considered eaid :R»bert8 migbt
be found ; but was infbrmed and believes he
isinot come tat»wn/^

[.Upoa. those affidavits beine readf> the
attorneyrgieneral. desired, that A«thttr
Roberta, might be called, which beii^
done, he aoswered.]

The prisoner was then asked,, whether be
was ready for his trial, as Mr. Roberts at-
tended ? — He answered, he was not ;. and inr
order to postpone the trial, twa other affidavits
were sworn.

The priBsneF madfe an affidavit^ stMing—
**That.on Mtttiday thellth instant, he causMf
a crown Bommon» to ^le served upon a^manof
the name of James May, who live»iD Gole«
aUeyv near Dtfealh^street,' and who is a^imtfe^
ricd witneu on behalf of deponent ; that he is*
infoimed and believes said Ma^* is lying dttn-
geiously itt'Oil his said place of resideiioe, and*
cannot- aitcnd'; that deponent- will use hisr
ulmostrendenvoiTrsj and myts and expecte tb
procure the attendance' or said May, if he
should reoov«r during thas^commtssion^ or bv
the nexticommis9iei>, and that' he caanofwitn
safety to his life abide his trial without ^thr
benefit* of theaestimony of the said May.'''

William MuUalluax^ an affidavit, staling
— ** That he served the summons upon Mav^
who was then lying in bis bed dai^rously
illy unaUe to get up, or attend.''

Mr. CurroH^ fov the prisoneiv moved Ur
postpone the trial upon these affidttvitn.

Mt: Mt^mtf General [The right benv
Arthur Wolfe, afterwards Lord Chief JuBtice
of the Court of Ring's-bench, andiViscDunf
Kilwaideti]* said^ the motion' earner, formed
under very siispieioifs citeumsftances,. as the*
neme of May*was wot mentioned, uniod it was^
found tliat Mr. Roberts appeared, so* th&t' it
WB8 eb^ous, that this wm an atlerapt* ^
evade bemg tried.

T^he CmiW thought ttre a^lkatioii saspi*
cious, and having intimated an opinion to \biB%
effbct, *

Ml*« MMthew Ditwlingy the prisoner's agents
made an affidkTit, slatitig, ^^That about a'
quarter of an hoilr after ten* o'clock ttns- niem<-
iuj^, before the Coimnis^ton Court- sat. Hie
prisoner api^ied' to deponent, amd-desiredhim'
to have an application made to postpone hie
trial in oonseqtienceof theabsenee oiFArthur
Roberts, ahd in-consequence of James May
being eonfined to his bed, and' King ill, and
requested deponent to have an affidavit of the
service of the 8orom<mSy by a man of the'
name of MuUallv, on said May prepared-^
That deponent numediatelv aller met the

Srisoner's wife, and desired her to find said
lullally, and bring him to deponent, or some
of bis derksi but deponent being informed^

tOS9] Jr>r High Treautn.

and belie wgy at thattioiciy «nd for^some time
aAcr, tb^t^said .Arthur fiobarts was not io
lowDy and tbat the trial would be postponed
in consequence of the affidavits prepared,
stating bis absence, for that leaaoq, and for
that reason onljf, the other affidavits made
this daj^ by, the prisoner asid.th« said MuUaily,
*ela;Uve to May, were not prepared at the4ime
the other affidavits relative to Roberts were
aworo.''

After some discussion upon'these aftdavlts,
the Court were pleased to order the trial to
stand over till the next day, and directed that
4n *the mean time farther raqairy should be
-fnade respecting the state or James May*s
health.

A. D. 1798*

11080

Tkurtdey^ December Ufhy 1797«

This day an affidavit <wa8 sworn oo behadf
of the .prisoner, by Philip Tuite and James
Rqgers, stating, ^ That they bad seenJ^ames
Jtf 1^ upon the preceding evening, at iNo. 6,
Cole-alley, who appears to be daqgeious(y
rii), and that he had been confined to his bod
£er four weeks and upwards/'

It was stated -on the pant of the crown, that
•a medical eentleman had •vkited James May,
No. 6« Cole-alley, and tbat it was peported,
his state of lieaUh did fnot permit him to at-
tend ia Court at-tbis eesaion.

Thelrid of the prisoner was then.postponeid
-until &e 8th of January :iieKt.

Moudasff Bth Joaaafy, 1798,

. The prisoner was -mit to tfiefiar, and askM,
whether he was reaay for his trial ?^-4tt an-
fwered that he was not.

Mr. Curr4mt for the .prisoner, movod to
postpone the trial, which motion Jtie founded
jupon an affidwrit made by the prisoner.

This affidavit stated^ that '* In the course
of last week, he was first informed tbat Peter
iienry aad Thonas Gwv w*hoiive at or near
Stradbally, are material witnesses £ar deipo-
jBent ; that iie caused crown summonses %o be
.issued. diiQoted to said Henry and Gray; ayad
to Roberts, who fonoseidy attended^ and that
Jbc caused Peter Leech to be sent down to the
•QueeD's county, in order to serve the said snra-
jDOAses, who deponent is convinced has ac-
cordiogly gone for that puifose, but has not
^et wtamed ; but dmneat expects and be-
lieves said Leech willwlurn in the course of
Jthis day, or ia the asoraing; and de^neat
caooQt with safetv to his lite abide his trial
sritbout the benefit of the teslimoay lof the
said Hecry, Gray, aad AoherU.

JVIr. ^f^erfi^y Oentral opposed this motion,
*nd said, the prisoner was not entitled to aay
farther indulgence? it did Be4 appear iWiiii
his affidavit, when tiie asesseager was sent,
and if he wew not sent off in siSkient time

to have the witnesses in town this day, due
dilieeace was not used to procure their at-
tendance.

The Court said, they would make no rule
tbr-aa hour, to see, whether the messenger
and witnesses might arrive;— and having gone
iato other business which occupied the day,
the prisooer was directed io be ready for his
trial upon Wednesday.

Wednud^, ^(Hh fyumuy^ 1708.

The prisoner was again put to the bar^ but
said, he was not ready for nis trial.

Mr. Carraa. — My lords, I am instructed to
move your loidsh\ps to postpone the trial of
the prisoner to the next commission, or rif
your loidships should not be disposed to^raat
such indulgence, that your lordships would
ipostpone to such shorter, period, as you may
think proper. — ^There has been a considerable
number of affidavits made in this case at
various timea^ principally relatiag to a man
of the name of James May, who has been
preveated by illness from attending to give
evidence on the pait of the prisoner. The
Couct thought ills absence a sufficient ireason
for postponing the trial, and as he is still
absent, and the cause of hi^ absence con-
tinues to exist, it is hoped, the Court wUi
postpone the tnaL — Here are some additional
affidavits which we desire to lay before the
Court.

The two fc/Ilowing atffidavits were then
'Tead: —

** The prisoaec, Patrick Finney, maketh
oath and saith, that James May, of Cole-
alley, in Meatb-stieet, in the city of Dublia,
is a material witness for deponent on the trial
in this pniaecntion, and deponent saith, he
hath caiued a crown summons to be issued in
this causop director to the said James May,
acquiring his attendance at the New Sessions
House in Gseea-stiael, in the counW of the
cilv of Dubliai on this day, to give evidence on
behalf 4>f de}ieBeBt;-^uid deponent saith, he
is ciedibly infosmed, aad believes that the
said ciowa suamons has b^en eerved on the
said James May, fersonallir» at his place of
abode ia Ckde^Uey aferesiud; but deponent
is credibly iafonnMt aad believes, that the
said JmrntM Mur 14 at ipraaent much indis-
posed, and conoaed to his bed, and not able
to attend oursuaat to the said summons ; but
deponent nopes and exptects the said James
May will be able to attend on behalf of depo-
nent, either during the preseirt commission,
or sttheaext commis^on of Oyer and Ter-
miner to be field for the totinty bf the city of
Dublin ; and deponent saith, he is advised
and behevas he cannot with safety to his life
abidebis trial, tn this case, without the benefit
afthetestiraaayt>fthe said James May; and
also without the benefit of the testimony of
Arthur fiaborti af SttadbaUy, es^. who is also

1031] 38 GEORGE III.

Trial ef Patrick Finney

[loss

a material witoess for deponent on hit trial in
this caM, and who, as deponent is credibly in-
ibrmed and believes, has been served with a
crown summons, rec^uiring his attendance in
this case, to eive evidence on behalf of depo-
nent, at the r^few Sessions House in Greea-
street, in the county of the city of Dublin, on
Monday last, and to attend from day to day ;
and deponent saith, he does not mean to give
any affected or upnecessajy delay to this pro-
secution."

'* Peter Leech of the city of Dublin, silk
weaver, maketh oath and stuth, that on
Sunday morning about the hour of eleven
o'clock, this deponent called at the house of
Arthur Roberts, esq. in Stradbally, in the
Queen's countjr, and then and there delivered
unto the son of the said Arthur Roberts, above
the age of eighteen years, a copv of a crown
summons, requiring Uie atteiMance of the
said Arthur Roberts, on Monday the eighth
dav of January, instan^ to jgive evidence on
behalf of the prisoner, in this cause, and to
attend from day to day ; and at the same time
de^ed the son of the said Arthur Roberts to
deliver the said copjr to his said ftither, and
which deponent verily believes he did, in as
much as deponent was informed by Mr.
Thomas Gray, who Hves in Stradbally afore-
said, and who came to Dublin in company
with deponent, for the purpose of attending
as a witness in this cause, that the said Arthur
Roberts had informed him, that he had been
served with said summons, but that bavins
signed jEi re/juisition for a meeting of severu
magistrates of the Queen's county, on Monday
last, the said Arthur Roberts must attend
said meeting, and could not attend till said
meeting was over. Deponent also sdth, on
Tuesday evening, the 9th day of January, in-
stant, this deponent personally served James
May at his Iodines, at No. 6, Cole-alley, in
the said city otDuDlin, with a copy of a crown
' summons, requiring the attendance of the said
James May, at the New Sessions House in
Green- street, in the county of the city of
'Dublin, on tnis day, to give evidence on be-
half of the prisoner in this case ; and depo-
nent saith, that at the time he so served the
said James May, said May appeared to depo-
nent to be very much indisposed, and totally
unable to come abroad or attend pursuant to
said summons ; and said May at said time
informed deponent that he was not Uien able
to attend, or even to leave his bed."

The Ccurt asked the attorney-general,
whether any affidavit would be made on the
part of the crown ; to which he answered
there would, and Dr. Harvey attending, he
was sworn to the following affidavit, which
was read:

^ William Harv^, M. D. maketh oath that,
on the 7th of January, instant, he attended a
person, who called himself James May, at
No. 6, Cole-alley, who is mentioned to be a
witness in this case; that said James May is

confined to his bed, and is in a most emaciated
and weak state, attacked with chronic head
ache, and not able to leave hb room to attend
the trial, and saith, there does not appear to
be much probability of the recovery of the
said May, and believes said May may con-
tinue for a considerable time in the same
state that he now is in, and that deponent
hath known persons in the same state to live
for several years, though not able to quit their
bedfr— that m December last, he also attended
the said M«y, and found him in the same
state he was in when deponent attended him
on the 7th of January, and that May said, he
had been confined seven weeks previous to
deponent's first seeing him.''

Mr. Attorney Oeneral. — My lords, I am to
oppose this motion which has been made on
the part of fte prisoner, and I have much to
lay before the Court, beyond what has been
stated. The prisoner was committed in the
month of May last :— in the month of July
following, a commission of Oyer and Termi-
ner was held, at which the prisoner was in-
dicted. A new session was held in the month
of October, when the prisoner was called upon
to be arraigned. The ^ler was desired to
bring him mto court; it was then suggested
that the prisoner was ill, and unable lo come
up to be arraigned^ and upon enquiry it ap-
peared that the prisoner had feverish anpear-
ances, and he was not broueht uo that oay.—
Upon the next day, it was desireo on die part
or the Crown, that he might be brought up ;
it was awn said he was unable to attend,
and Dr. Scott, the physician, was sent to visit
him ; the doctor returned, and was exammed
upon oath, touching the state in wluch he
foupd the prisoner. He did say, that the pri-
soner said ne was ill ; the doctor was asked,
what he thoueht respecting the prisoner's
health-^he said, he was indined to think it
was a sham illness.

Mr. Justice CAom^liitfi.— We cannot at-
tend to this, not appearing before us now by
affidavit.

Mr. Aitchtey Genera/.— It was a parol exa-
mination certainly, before another judge.
But I may state this :— that the prisoner was
not arraigned at that sessbn. At the ensuing
sitting, in the month of December, the pri-
soner moved to put off the trial upon an affi-
davit, by which it was stated tnat Arthur
Roberts, a rendent of Stradbally, thuty miles
distant m>m Dublin, was a material witness^
and had been served with process, and did not
attend. He however was called, and an-
swered his name: thereupon an affidavit was
made, that James May, the person now men-
tioned, was confined in Cole Alley, by illness,
and was unable to attend, but that his attend-
ance at a future day wiu expected. I did
then, on the part of the crown, observe u|Nm
the extraordinary attempt to put off the trial,
by swearing that Mr. Roberts did not attend,
and when that failed, that another persoa

I0S3]

far High Treoion.

A. D. 1798.

[1034

should be mentioned. The prisonei's attor-
ney then made an affidavit, that he had been
really instructed, that May was a material
witness, and that the first affidavit was con-
fined to Roberts, because if one were absent
it was thought unnecessary to say any thing
respecting the other. The motion was then
entertained upon the absence of May, and the
Court expressed a wbh, that a gentleman of
the medical profession should visit the alleged
witness, upon which the discussion was post-
poned until the next day, when it appeared,
that the person was in an ill state of nealth,
and unable to attend. Thereupon the trial
was postponed till last Monday, and now your
lordships are called upon to postpone it till
the next commission^ and the ground upon
which the application is made must, upon the
present debate, be conceded to be, that May
18 now unable to attend ; I say, that must be
conceded as the ground, because Roberts may
be had most probably ; or if he be not attend-
ing now^ he may be had by next Monday.
The decision of this question must be, as a
precedent of great importance. It is now
solemnly debated before three judges of the
land sitting together * The general grounds
of postponing trials are these : — the witness,
on account of whose absence the trial is post-
poned, must appear to the Court to be a ma-
terial witness tor the trial, and that the
application is not made merely for the pur-
]>ose of delay, but for the attainment of jus-
tice : it must appear that proper means have
been used to procure the attendance of the
alleged witness, and that there is a reasonable
ground to hope, that the witness will attend
at a fijture dav.— I believe these general rules
are to be collected from the cases decided
upon the subject. It must appear, that the
witness is material ; it is by no means suffi-
cient to swear, that he is so : if, upon exami-
ing the several affidavits that are made
upon the motion, the Court shall collect, that
the motion is not made for the purpose of at-
taining justice, or the prisoner's defence,
there, however positively the prisoner or any
other may avei the fact, yet that fact shall not
conclude the case. Instances of that sort are
not infrequent. In the Chevalier D'Eon's
case, though it was sworn positively, that a
witness was mikterial, yet it appearing from
the whole of the affidavits that the case was
not so, the Court concluded, that the applica-
tion was for the purpose of delay, ana they
refused to postpone tne trial.

I submit to jour lordships, that the pri-
soner's object 18 to postpone the trial, and
not to have the witness attending. If^ your
lordships are satisfied of that, the trial cannot
be postponed; and again, I submit, that
another of the&e rules fails the prisoner,
namely, that there is a reasonable expecta-
tion, that the attendance of the witness will

*Mr. Justice Chamberlain, Mr. Justice
Downes, and Mr. Baron George.

t

be procured. When I state this I am sensi-
ble it is a new case, and of great importance.
It is of the greatest importance, not to the
prisoner alone, but upon general principles in
the prosecution of criminals charged with
ofiences.

Your lordships will be pleased to observe,
that it does appear from Dr. Harvey's affida-
vit, that May is lying in the same dangerous
state as he was in October, seven weeKs bo-
fore the 11th of December.— It appears by
Mr. Dowline's affidavit, upon the 11th of
December, that the prisoner told him that
morning, that May was a necessary witness;
but he does not say, that the prisoner ever
suggested, that the witness was materia^
although the prisoner was indicted many
months before, and his present agent was
employed by him. The prisoner was served
with a copy of the indictment, and it must be
presumed that he was preparing for bis de-
fence. May had been lying bed-ridden in
Dublin seven weeks before. The prisoner
now desires to postpone his trial upon the ab-
sence of a witness, who never appeared before
to be necessary ; and therefore I submit, that
there is pound to conclude, that the prisoner
has mentioned this May for the mere purpose
of postponing the trial, and not for the puroose
of attaining justice ; and to that is to be added
this circumstance, that he mentions this day
the names of two persons never mentioned
before. He endeavours to account for that,
by saying, that he was informed, without
saying he believes it, that they are material
witnesses. Therefore I say there is ground
to conclude, that the prisoner does not desire
the postponement to procure the witness to
defend himself, but for the purpose of delay.

As to the other ground, that a witness is
uck and unable to attend, and upon whose
account the trial has been so often postponwt,
bow does that stand } Dr. Harvey has been
called upon to examine the man, tne prisoner
has not sent any medical person to visit him ;
if the crown had not sent the physician, the
^ct would be this: — In December the man
was sick, and the prisoner would say, he
thought him sick, and the bailiff said he had
served him with a summons. But it was
right and fair, that the Court should know
the whole circumstances of the case, and that
the prisoner should have advantage of the
situation of the witness, if he can nave any.
This man has been eleven weeks bed- ridden ;
extremely emaciated, with littie prospect of
recovery; and Dr. Harvey says he has Known
men in the same state live several jrears ; the
consequence of putting off the trial on ac-
count of the absence of this man, will be, in
all reasonable probability, to put it off during
the life of the witness. Here then, the gene-
rsd rule fails, that there is a reasonable expec-
tation, that the attendance of the witness can
be procured. It is of great consequence to
the administration of public justice, that this
case should be well and soundly consider-

1035] 88 GEORGE UL

ed. ir^pur Icurdftbipe ue a»tisfied that this
alleged witness has oeen £zed upon with «
view to delay, there can ibe no. doubt ihat the
motion must be refused. But then on the
other handy if such be not the object of ^the
motion, there arises a great and abstract ques-
tion^ namely, thai whefethe Court ;are satis-
fied the attendance of a witness cannot be
.had, whether the trial shall be fjK)m time to
time postponed, until that person shall die.
.If the amrmatiye "of that proposition wese
established, the.consequence would be, that-a
jnao, unwilUns to hazard a tda^ would have
jiothmg to do, l>ut to fix upon a debilitated
person, likely to live, but unable to attend :
there are few towns, where such, persons caa-
3iot be (found, and such. a, general .rule would
be of dancecoiis tendency. Therefore the
niotion ougnt to he cefitsed ; :because the .ob-
ject is delay, and not the administration of
justice ; and because one of the rules ;a^i-
cable to cases of this kind fail^, namely, .that
jthere is a reasonable expectation of ine at-
tendance of the witness at a future day, to
.which the trial may be postponed. I say .this
muct^, niy lords, upon a case of great im|iort-
jince^ And semewluit new, makjLAg a ps^oe-
den^ tf&cting the general administration of
justice — thecetctre it is of more importance
^han the quff tioi^ whether the prisoner's trial
ahall be poa|ppniid4» Monday, or aomeiUher
^bort time. J urn sure the case will receive
that cqnsideration it desences, and every one
will be satisfied with the decision.

Mr. SoliciUfr .GtnertU [John Tder, afler-
iprards Lord Ohief Justice of Abe CQua 4>f
.Common Pleas and Lood Nor.bury].-^My
JiOtdSy Mr. vfrttomcgr Geneial has staled the
minute jcircumatanoes of the case, and this
l>eing a q»e likelv lo be drawn into prece-'
ident, 1 may he allowed to say .a wnrd in add^
lion. It certainly is a first ipriiicble of -our
law, not to -aaoebrate unnecessarily the trial
4)f ^ man for jbus life, and particularly wdien
ehai^ed with ««9 high annronce as that which
is the subject of the fircseot indictment. Op
thejother nan«), jwvr ierdships irill think it m
laf thei]|mo84.€Qtttoeni, that oSences of this
fund, with wAuch the nrisoncr ham beea ^so
]ongicha»ed, should, atter reasonable iiviul-
4i;«nqp, benrpi^t to trial. The witnesses far
$ht ctfiWQ omne^ be ensured to live, and it m
|}art.Qf the calamitous mischief of the times,
that witnesses are nuisdored and conspkacies
/(owed a»o«( them.**— —

Air. ^ Nolly 4—1 hope tliis is not to attach
sipon the prisoner.

PSj.fSJicUm' /&eaer«t— I was going tp^coo-
dude the sentencej if I had not been inter*
Aipt^d, wMh /sayin^ God £»rhid that snch an
inteotien should ever be sup^sed U> be har-
l>ouned in the mind of the man at the bar,
wiiom I am wUli^g lo aupjiose for the present
^0 he innocent of ever;^ crime. But I did not
wantonly ahu^ the privil^e whidi the Court
pillowed me, sn Airging the possibility of that
Jiusdaief hafipcnipg to a witness, who is now

Trial of Patrick Finney

[loas

fortbcomii^ ; at the same Ume, that notbii^g
is more foreign to .my feelings than to impute
the most remote idea of sucL a proceeding to
the prisoner.

I look upon the great sround, upon which
these motions are decided, to be that which
shall regulate the discretion of the Court,
under all the circumsAanoe^ as to the mate^
riality of the witness. It is a first principle,
tliat from the time of the committal, themr^
is supposed to be preparing for his defence.
Here tne committal was in Say in theicily of
Dublin. Your lordships are not only in pos-
session of the precedents and cases, hut you
recollect the remarkable passage in Foster,*
Wihere he observes, that upon occasion similar
to the .present, affidavits of this kind oiu^ht to
,be sparingly admitted. The materiality of
the evidence is the principal ground *. under
all the circimistances, have you enoueh to re-
jgulate your discretion, and to enable you to

E resume, that the witness is not material ? I
ope to satisfyyour lordships, that you must
presume it First, the trial ought to have
neen had in October— the party had reason to
esjpect his trial .at that time. Next, the ad-
Jojumment was to December, and the wit-
nesses now mentioned were not summoned
until the eve of the day preceding the trial.
At one time the agent is informed of the
jBaterialiW of the evidence npon the momii^
of the trial. The ^gent was at that time pre-
pared with counsel and briefs, and the neces-
aary ingredients upon whicn lo deiend hia
client : then upon that day, for the first time,
afi^ the failure of an attenpy|>t whkh^ had
been relied upoi^ the j>nsoner states he is in-
formed this witness is .materiaL — ^What! a
trial ftfqiaied for so long a time— all due and
solemn Reparation haa--cQunsel and agent
assigned in Julv/-«the defence arranged-nand
on the 0th of December, the same active
agent informed the Couft, he first heard of
\Se materiality of the witness. These cir-
cumstancea^ tc^ther with his having relied
upon the ahsence of another witness, ^peak
more eoD^aticaUy tlian any argument. If
the apnlu»tion were to adjourn to some very
early wn^ such ss the approaching Monday,
I showkf not be disposed Mo ci^eci to it. In
Fitzgerald's case, there was « postponement
At the £rst assizes, and a similar attempt was
jgpade upon the a4ioumment The combim^
tiofli of circumstances was weisbed by the
Cour^ and the indulgence had been {^ven in
the first instance to take awav the possibiiil^
of adeubty yetit would not be conceded in
the latter. Here the prisoner has been ia-
4Mge49 &im1 has jMOt entitled himself to arepa-
tition of it.

Mr. jfustice CAomkr^am.— It is our deter-
mination to call the judges together, and have
their opinion upon this case. We shall give
tlieir decision on Friday ueMt^ and in the mean
time we shall have adl the affidavits which

«SeeV<4.18«p^S81.

103^

for High' Trtaggjm.

A. D: 17d8.

[1038

have been made in the casoi ftirnishedtO'the
judgiss.

[JVoff . That sixteen other persons indicted
for the same of!eace said tbey were ready
for their trials.]

Friday^ Januufy 19^A^ 1796*

The prisoner was put to the bar, and asked,
whether he was ready for his trial?— He
aaswered in the negative.

Mr. Justice CHamherlain^'^ltk thiv ease
there has been an apphcationon the part of
the prisoner to put off bis trial ; there was
something indennite aS' to the ttme. We
uoderstaira, however, in substance, that it is
a motion to postpone the trial until- the next
commission^ because tbe approach of the term
will' not admit of a trial, iC it be putoff farther
than IVfonday, or Tuesday neit : so that sub-
stantially, tlieouestioQ is, wlietber this^motion
shall be complied with by putting off tlie trial
until the next commission ?

Motions of this kind; particularly where
tbe charge against the prisoner is high treason,
must always be of the utmost impoitance;
and in consequence of thftt, and of seme
novelty- in thiscase^ it was the opinion of two
judges with me, that this matter ought to be
referred to all the judges in town. It has
been accordingly referred to them, and I am
new au^erifeed to deliver their unanimauy
opinion* All the judges were present, exce)»t
Xiord Yelverten^ Mr. 'Justice Kelly, and Mr:
BaroaMetep. Tbenine judgeain town are
unanimous^ of opaniony that this motion^ ia
the extent m which it is made, cannot be
complied with.

Motions of this sort are always addressed to
the sound discretion of the Court, founded
upon affidavits; but tbe affidavit is not to be
held to contain su/Hcient ground for putting
off the trial, merely because it is in common
form. The Court must be satisfied that due
dUigenee has been used to bring the witness
wh^ attendance is sought for;— 'Sndly.
That the absent person would be really a
material witness, or at least that the* prisoner
or other person making the affidavit on his
behalf does believe so ; — and Srdljr. That there
19 a reaaonable expectation of hi^heing pro-
duced at a future day.

With regard to this witness, James Bfay,
being a material witness, it is necessary to
consider all the circumstances attending the
prisoner's application to the Court. He is
charged witn high treason together with
sixteen other persons: upon looking into the
hiformations, he is charged with having taken
the most active part; they are all complicated
in one charge ; the defence, in all probability
is a common one, all but the prisoner have
presented petitions under the Habeas Corpus
act to be tried, and upon being called up
have insisted n|K>n being tried. Ine prisoner

akme it net ready., if tbey hSEnrbeewnBgullir
in their petitions' (upon which- 1 give no opi«
iiioni at present) they must be tried at' this:
ceninissioOy or b» discharged. If they shdli
be tried, the crown will be under tbe necessi*>
ty of pubUshing the evidence* ajgainst^the pri-
soner^ who is eharged aa> the leader iathe
treason i

It appeanr that the prisoner W8» clmiiiiftted<
ii»thtt ntonth of Mliy last,, ae the July cetn^k
mission counsel w«re assigned' hhn^ and at
the same time Mr. Dowltng was* appointed
his agent: iitf tbeOctober comraiasloii, it'was
proposed^ thai; he should be brought idtiy
Court to plead, when* it was suggested, ebat
his health would not admit of it; Dr. S^t
waa sent into tlie gaoi^ and he^ repertud, that
he did not think: Uie prisoner to be- iil>a' state
to be brought into oourt; in a' fe# days after,
Dn. Scoit was ejKsfnined in court upon oath^
and he then, as I at»aud)orizedto^siate-b^
Mr. Justice Boyd^ who presided at thai tlme^
declared, thati be did behevo'tttv inability el^
the prisoner had -proceeded from sdne niedi-*
cine be had taken to agtUCe hie poise.

However, in that ooiBmissioil' be way net'
armigned>; Dr. Scott wti» asked, wfaethei^the*
prisoner was able to undergo w trials and he
woaldnov take- upon himaO' say^ that the
prisoner wm able W nndergb s long triidv
Therefore the counsel fo^ thtofenMrndidnet^
prcss?tehriing» hhiP forward aitfa«t time.

The. next steprww upon- the istb of D^
cember^ when thrprisen^wae called npois
to take his- trial. He had been previoasly
arraifi«ied ; and upon that movning, he wa»
called* upon to* take his trial. An- affidavit
was- made by the prisoner, staling, that a Mr.
Roberts' WHS a materia} witness m'hls defbnee,
that he liad been served wMi a snmihonS) and^
did not attend, and therefore the prisoner'
movedito postpbne bis triad; bur upon Mh.'
Roberts being calle^ it was found at waaiii''
cMirt. Then the prisoner, finding himself
disappointed, made another affidavit^, stating^
that James'May vAm a malbriid witness, thar
he had been-served wHha-sammens^ and tbat-
without his presence he could not go to triat*
with safety. Jtv seemed extraordina«)y* tl^t
May shonM no« have been- included in the*
first affidavit; upon- which Mr. Dowlint^,, th<f
prisoners agent, msde an> affidavit; stafing^r
that it wae owing' to on omission^ of hiy* for*
though May-was not included, the prisoner Ml
about a quarter of an hour after ten o^dock'
that monnng, before the Court sat, had' ap-'
plied tohim to have a motion made to the*
Court, to postpone his trial in consequence ot-
the absence of Roberts and May, who the^
prisoner told him were material witnessed for'
him on the trial. It ntust be remembered^
that Mr. Dowling had been assigned a»
attorney to the prisoner in July; and this^ affi-
davit was made on the 13th of December, from*
which it does not apoear, that Ma/s being a
material witness ban been intimated to Mr.
Dowling before that day. And the attorney

1039] S8 GEORGE IIL

of the prisoner whose du^flt would have been
to have examined May, if there had been any
intention of producing him, omito to state
upon his belief, ihaX May would be a mate-
rud witness.

However, upon these affidavits the trial
was put oft' for some time, and so from time
to time until the last adjournment, and the
prisoner stood for trial on Monday the 8th
of this month ; unon that day he was to have
expected his trial, and just as he was called
on, Mr. Dowline produced an affidavit of the
prisoner's, by wnich it appears, that Roberts
and two other persons had b^n served with
summonses to attend on Monday. — But it is
observable that the summonses were only
served the day before, the witnesses live in
the country, one of them in StFadballv, thirty
utiles from Dublin, so that it would hardly
be conceived, that the prisoner was serious in
the service of the summonses.

This affidavit upon which he moved before
me mentioned three persons, Henry, Grey,
and Roberts; but does not make any men-
tion of M^, this material witness, and his
counsel at first moved, slating the absence of
the jthree witnesses in the affidavit, of whom
May was not one ; — ^upon a conference, how-
ever, the necessity of May's attendance is re-
vived, and all that passed upon a former oc-
casion is again stated.

The next affidavit is one sworn upon the
lltli of January b^ the prisoner, stating that
May was a material witness, and had beoi
served with a summons, and the man who
served it appears to have served it on Tues-
day the 0th, although the trial had been ex*
jpsected upon Monday the 8th, for which dav,
Iday does not appear to have been summoned ;
he was not aummonod until the day after the
trial was to have taken place. So that in
^i that service was evidently for the purpose
of motion, not for the trial.

Taking all these circumstances together, it
was for the consideration of the judges,
whether they believed, that the allegation or
May being a material witness was founded,
ornot?

And they are unanimously of opinion, that
although a trial should not be pressed for-
ward, where there is any danger to the pri-
soner from his not being prepared; yet, that
the truth of the allegations in the affidavit for
putting off the trisd must be judged of by
them :— That it is in fact an issue directed to
the judges, whether the application be made
for the purpose of delay, or not ? And that
there are many circumstances to be collected
in this case, from time$ and data of tlie affi-
^vits, the times of serving the several sum-
monsesy the conduct of the prisoner andiiis
attorney, and the fnirticular situatkm of the
case as connected with other prisoners, which
induce a belief, that this application is not
what it is professed to be, but is intended
either for unnecessary delay, or as a stratagem
made use of to compel the ooui^ for the

Tiial of Patrick Finney

[1040

crown to disclose their evidence, or dischaige
the other prisoners under the Habeas Corpus
act ; if they have been regular in their pro-
ceedings. The judges, havine with the ut-
most attention read all the affidavits, cannot
say that this is a fair bond fide application, in
order to provide necessaiy evidence for the
prisoner.

With regard to the situation of May, it is
something extraordinary, on the 13th of
December Dr. Harvey visited May, who said
he had then been confined seven weeks ; he
states him to be afflicted with a chronic head
ache, and that there is not much probability
of his recovery, but tliat he may linger manv
years. If this motion were compRed with
from May's situation^ and the trial were put
off till next commission, the prisoner would
be entitled, during May's life and inability to
attend, totiet quotia to put off his trial.
However, in stating this, I am desired by the
judges to say, that if they were satisfied upon
the other grounds, that this application was
necessary to the defence of the prisoner, and
fairly made, they, notwilhstanaing the situa-
tion of May, might postpone the trial, to see
whether it might not please Providence to re^
store him at some future time.

But upon the whole, ,they are of opinion,
that it is not fit, or meet for the administra-
tion of justice, that this application should be
complied with in the extent which is sought.
However, the prisoner will have till Monday
to prepare for his trial, which will be near
eight months after his committal, and two
months after thi sickness of the witness.

The Clerk if the Crown then told the pri-
soner to be ready for his trial upon Monaay,
to which day the Court adjourned.

Jlfondoy, January 15M, 1798.

The prisoner was nut to the bar, and asked
whether he was reaay for his trial.

Patrick Finney. — My lords, although I am
deprived of the testimony of May, I hope the
Court will not deprive roe of the other witness,
Mr. Roberts ; I sent a man and horse for him
on Friday evenine.

Court, — If you have anything to lay before
us it must be by affidavit, otherwise the trial
must go on.

The panel was then called over, and when
the prisoner was put to his challenges^ he
tendered an affidavit.

Mr. M*NaUy,^^l move your lordships to
have this affidavit rrad.

Which was accordingly ordered.

It was an affidavit made by the prisoner,'
stating, that Arthur Roberts was a material
witness, and that on Friday the ISth of
January, he caused a crown summons to be
issued, directed to said Roberts, requiring his
attendance on Monday the 15th instant;—
that deponent sent Peter Leech, with a hired

1041]

Jbf High, Treason.

A. D« 1798.

[1042

horse, iib ser^e said sunmons; that Roberts
had not come to town, nor had Leech return-
ed ; but deponent hopes and expects the atp
tendance of said Roberts in the course of this
6Bf, as said lieech bad particular directions to
intornL. said Roberts, that deponent's trial
would positively come on this morning.

Mr. Attorney OeneraL — My lords, I must
oppose this apphcation. Your lordships are
aware of the circumstances, which have
already occurred. The ground of this appli-
cation is, that on Friday, without saying what
time of the day, a messenger, was sent to
Stradbally, thirty miles from town. This is
Slot that sort of diligence, which mi^ht be
expected: it might have been late m the
evening of Friday. He has been a prisoner
many months, and it is not using au'e dili«
gence to have sent a. messenger some time on
Friday. It mav be said, that till Friday, he
did not icnow tne result of the former appli-
cation. But as he did not know it, he was
bound to be ready for his trial. The Court
misht have ordered his trial for Saturday;
ana it is no expuse, that he did not send till
Friday. — ^He says he expects the witness in a
few .hours.

. Mr. JHI^Nalfy. — My lords, I say nothing as
to the rieht of the Court to bring a trial on ;
but tbeyliaTe discretion and humanity. It
was Tour o'clock on Friday, before the pri-
aoner knew his trial would come on this day :
the instant he was apprized of that, he sent
off a messenger to dtradbally. Roberts had
been seryed with a summons for the 8th, but
could not attend on account of a sessions €^
the peace. In the case of a man upon trial
for. his life, his situation will have greater
wpight with your lordships than any thing I
can add. . .

.,9Hu Justice Chamberlain, — ^Notwithstand-
ing the royal proclamation for a public thanks**
giving to- morrow, we must sit ; and therefore
we wul put off the trial to that time. There
are piaoy prisoners in the gaol to be tried,
and they are entitled to be tried ; therefore
ffom tbe necessity of the case, term approach-
iqg so near,, we mtist sit to-morrow. Prisoner,
you must endeavpur to be ready to-morrow.

ISiaday, January 15<A, 1798.

, The prisoner was piit to the bar, and asked
whether he was ready for his trial.

Jpruon<r.r7My' lords, I am informed, that
J^tr. Roberts is not arrived yet.

The panel was then called over.

. Mr. ,Cttrraiii^«— My.lords, I shall not mention
any thing as to ^e competency of the Court
to sit upon a 4aj^Vct i^axt by aj>roclamation
£^X particular pj^servanccu or to fine a witness
TOO mjay be aoseut, or tne jurors who do not
^tebd. The' messenger ,is returped from
Stradbally^ buV tl^ witnfiss is not aririvfd.
|(e ^ might, >u|H^ ^^ Wind not be waoU8|g

VOL. XXVI. ' ^

upon this day, though he might have been
bound to attend yesterday. The prisoner may
in some measure lose the benefit of challenges
by the absence of persons returned upon the
panel. The challenge is in favour of the
party and for his ease of mind.

Mr. Justice Chamlferlain, — ^You do not wank
to challenge men who are not here.

Mr. Curran. — No, ray lord; but many
l^ing absent may oblige us to accept of some
upon the jury whom otherwise we would
challenge.

An amdavit was then read :-^it was made
by Peter Leech, and it stated, that on Friday
evening last, after the Court had adjourned,
he received directions from Matthew Dow*
ling, the prisoner's agent, to go then imme-
diately, and with as much expedition a& pos-
sible, to Stradbally, for the purpose of serving
a crown summons upon Arthur Roberts, re-
quiring his attendance to give evidence on
Monday the 16Ui of Januarv, instant; and
having got such summons and a copy thereof,
proceeded to Stradbajly aforesaid, with all the
expedition in his power, and on Sunday mom*
ing last, about eleven o'clock, served the said
Arthur Roberts with a copy of the summons,
by delivering the same to his son, aged twenty
years and upwards, at the house of the said
Arthur Roberts in Stradbally, and at the same
time desired him to deliver the said copy to
his father the said Arthur. — And deponent
saith the said son at the same time tola depo-
nent, that the said Arthur Roberts was not
then at home, but that he could not attend
pursuant to said summons, as he, said Robert s^
was obliged to attend another sessions at
Stradbally, and the said son said he would not
receive the summons, and wanted to return
same to deponent, which deponent refused^
and left said copy with said Roberts's son. .

Mr. Cttrran.— ?There is strong ground laid
by this affidavit to postpone the trial. — As to
the other circumstances to which I alluded a
minute or two ago, they are judicially in the
knowledge of the Qourt. I may venture te
say, it was not expected by any person, that
the Court would sit this da^. It is not for
me to say, what was in the mind of tlie Court
itself, but I understand it was said to, be a
sitting made necessary by the peculiar state
of business — when that was not the idea of
the public or of Mr. Roberts, in what a situa-
tion will my client find himself, if thus cirt-
cumstanced he undergoes a trial ? Your lord-
ships have judicial knowledge, that many of
the jurors do not attend.

Courf.— The officer informs us eighty-seven
attend; only seventy-four appeared yester-
day.

Mr. Ctirran.-nlt is true ; but the law gives
him certain privileges, and his power as to re-
pelline a certain number is abridged ; if any
one of the jury, who would be the object of
his choice, be absent, he cannot have that
choice, an^ he may be obliged to put himself
.upon some' other, perhaps a very worthy ma&

5 X -^.

I04S] 38 GEORGE III.

Trial ^Patrid^ Fbme^

[1M4

but with whom the prtsomer might not tKink
his hear| at cane, and Jie might lose that col-
lection of mind, which^s necessary for him to
malde communicaticn with his counsel for his
dofenoe. I menlioB the case of a single joror ;
ii is manifest, I am understating the hard-
ships of my client, when I am stating the case
of a single joror being absent.—- It may be the
cntive oiwnge of hb jury— the stay ins away
of twelve men under an impression that no
business would be done. I feel the force of
the objection which may be made, that a
Bftialler number appeared vesterday. That
may be a oipcumstance or terror upon the
mind of the prisoner. I do not know what
kind of construction his mind may give it —
Now, mjr lords, can a juror be finea ? suppose
an application made to fine any juror who
does not appear ; will not the Court think it
an excnse, tnat such a man should come after-
wards and say, *' I read a proclamation en-
Joinirig a particular mode t>f duty for this day.
• — I did suppose that wcmld have been yielded
to by courts of justice, and in obeying that
proclamation, I did not think I would incur
the censure of his majesty'is court of justice.*'
Would it be possible to fine that man .^— It
would be hard to inflict a penalty upon any
man attending to that proclamation. I need
not press this matter farther. The great
mind of the Court will supply every collateral
cinsumstance. In a case of this importance,
the trial should stand clear of every doubt. I
need not warn the Court. Their own huma-
nity and good sense make it unnecessary. I
am assured of that. I confine myscdf to the
situation of my client, and I breech your
lordships not to sufiertbis trial to (;o on, until
there can be a means of compelling all the
panel and all the witnesses to attend. They
come within the same class of objection, with
this dtfiference, that there is -more fatality to
the prisoner in thecase of a witness. I cannot
iuppose that any juror comes into the box
^ith an unfair impression upon his mind;
but the prisoner may^ know matters worse
than I do. As to a witness, it is clear, that
his absence may be the difierence of life or
death tothe party. *Che determination of the
Court yesterday to sit this day, could not
Imve reached Mr. Rdberts, and therefore, I
trust, the Court'wilHhink under these circum*
Titances, that it would be a great hardship to
bring this trial on, and that your lordships
will-not do it.

Mr. Al^^a%»^Tf your loniships minds be
hot made up, I will sugeest one objection.
The proclamation says, 'HVe strictly charge
itnd command that said' day bej'egularly ob-
served ;" and all prosecutions are carried on
in the name of the king; and this isa^case
not merely of that -species Wliere the name of
the king is usedto pnocure justice for the sub-
ject, but itis a prosecution patticularly carried
on at the suit of the king Wmtfelf, for an in-
jury to himself. This day then Iteingcappro-
ftiated; by the king, to <me >partjetlkr pufw

t

pose, that of relieioii, I lobinit wholber liifs
act of the king, who is 1^ fomitsBi of justice,
and has a control ov«r the Courts, is not an
adjourament by the Mng himself. I leawe
this to your iovdifeipB discielion, iHwIhcr it
be of -suffiflieiit force to indvoe you to adjourn
till to-morrow.

Mr. Auanmf GentntL^Hy lords, ob the
part of the crown, I find it mjr duty lo oppcM
this motion, leaving it certainly to your dis-
cretion, and only saving thus mu^; with re-
gard to the objection on the groynd of the
proclamatioa, it woidd have been more de-
corous to <lhe proclamation, and the dty of
Dublin, to have made tlie objectwn yester-
day: it is DO objection in law against Una
sitting of 4he Court ; but it must be obvious
to every man, that the sole d>joct, whidi the
Court bad in sitting was, to deliver the gaol,
and though I was aniious^ with others, to
have attended religious service this^y, I did
upon that ground, submit to the Courtiilling
for the dispatch of business. I cannot aop-
pose the counsel serious in iiis objection on ac-
count of the attenduxje of -the jury. He says*
he cannot tell what terror thcve may be upo»
the prisoner by reason of their number. I aoi
incapable of understanding what be moaDs.
The prisoner can be under no terror ; he has
received from the Court, firom the first day,
down to this hour, every indolgepoe wbidi
man could have, and extramdinaiy iadulraice
indeed. lAnother objection is, that Rolierts
does not attend. The roessoiffer had not
thirty *eigbt 'miles to go, snd he uid BOt amve
at StradMly nntil Sunday morning; that was
not'due diligence. I do solemnly dedaie lliat
I wish Mr. Moberts*weie present But I sub-
mit-to your lords that it is unusual %b paft offti
trial fit>m time to time in this manner. If «lie
wilness'do not attend, ht maybepnnislwd;
but if n prisoner will swear that a 'person is
necessary to 'bis^d^fonee, tmd ^uit person will
not attend, the ^prlsonertnay never be tried.
But upon 'the widle matter, I 'subo^ it ts
your kffd^hfps, Whe^r you wiMpiDeoed'Or
not. I (know 'not •whether 'Mr. KOMrts be m
town or not; it'is^ijly Atoted, that Ms mm
s«d, (fae would mtaftend; ^Rre«aiiiiot;aup«
pose he will pertinaciously disobey the sum-
mons. I say thus much, my lords, because I
thought iinocesaaiy..; ^eo'shoaldicAect upofi
the reason of the Court sitting this day ; it is
in'fkvonrt>f ^e jnisoner. 'l£e Court had no
other object in ailiouming-to ^is dav, but to
«ve the prisoner an 'Opportunity or proving
his innocence, -if be can; und Ibat be may be
dischaised tern Ihettot

Mr. Justice CAoimrbtii.— It was out of
favour to ftie 'prisoner tint we did not sit
yeMcftd^. M^moutned to this dttf fow>
tommodite Fblm. 'Wo have no manner of
iSmolhf in-sayiqg, that this trial imiat gs on.
I>Qe ddiMnce ^do^ not a|mear to have been
tfsed. "Imtt is an essential point in cases tf
ibis Idnd. The trial vm to have «ome on
y, snd tliosununoiiS'«was not served

10463

fir High Treoiotu

A. D. nas.

[1046

until eleven o^clock on Sunday. That is an
ingredient upon which this case haa been £0-
vernedy and has been determined by all the
judges here.

Aft to the proclamation, it hardly lies in the
mouth of the prisoner to make an objectioa
upon it. He made an objection to his being
tried yesterday, and lest h}( oossibility injustice
might be done, we did, with great pain to our-
selves, adjourn to this day ; therefore I think
this ol^ection does not lie in the prisoner's
mouth, or that of his counsel.

With regard to the jury, I cannot under-
stand that objection. A full panel appears,
and if either Baron Smith or I could, m the
most remote degree, conjecture, that any in-
jmtice could occur, we vrould postpone the
triaL Therefore the trial must go on.

Frutmer. — My lord, the messenger was de-
tained on the road. The character of the
prosecutor is so infamous.

The following jury was sworn :— -

Patrkk Bride, Wm. SaeU Magee,

Robert Patten, Maurice Roberts,

David Weir, Thomas Roberts,

Bkbard Lewis, Bishop King Cunlifik,

Patrick Jones, Christopher Ormsby,

Thomas Read, Edward Armstrong.

£i^ pencma called on the pa^l were put
by on the part of the crown.

Nineteen were challenged peremptorily by
the prisoner.

And four were challenged for want of free*
hoM.

The Couit ordered the prisoner's irons to be
taken off.

Mr. lUdgeway opened the indictment.

. Mr. Aiiam^ Oentnd. — ^My Lords and
Gentiemen of the Jury ; The prisoner at the
bar stands indicied before you for high treason.
—-Of treason, gentlemen, there are several
species. He stuids charg^ed with two species ;
one is* compassing and imagining the death
of the king; the other is, adhering to the
king's enemies — adhering to the persons
eiereisipg the powers of government in
France, wing ai war with the Jking.

Gentlemen, the first species, thatof com*
passing and imagining the death of the king,
ought to be expwioed to you ; that duty the
Court will no doubt, folly discharge, I shall
therefore content myself with briefly stating,
that in order to bring ^ charge home to the
prisoner, it is not necessary to produce evidence
to show, that he had it in his immediate de-
sign and contemplation to take away the life
oTthe king. In our law. any act done that
leads naturally, ukimalely, or in its oonse-
menoes to destroying the royal life, is coqsi-
oered as an overt act to compass the death of
Um king. The preservatkm of the life of the
king is necessary to the tranquilii^ of the
stale: any atCaek upon thai Kfe, however in*-
~ r, has a tAodency to destroy lh»t tran-

quiUity, and the peace and prosperity of the
subjects whom he governs. As tor instance ;
if war be levied* though not for the purpose of
destroying the life of the king, it has a ten<»
dency to destroy it ; because he must resist
that war, and thereby his life will be endan*
gered. Again, if conspirators invite the
loreign enemy to invade the idngdom, it is
settled law, that it is a compassing the death
of the king, because his life must be exposed
in resistic^ the enemy, if they invade the
kingdom.

The other charoe is for adhering to the
kinn's enemies. Tne term itself si%ciently
explains the nature of that crime. By €n€mie$
are understood those who are at war with the
king, and any adherence to such personsp
thus at war, constitutes that species of high
treason.

Gentlemen, the law of this country makes
it necessary, that persons cliarged with trea-
son, the highest offence that a subiect can
commit, shsUl be informed by the indictment
of some act or acts, upon which the charge is
founded, in order that they may know how to
prepare for their defence. The acts so to be
disclosed by the indictment are called avcfi
acit^-^-wcH which are to be plainly proved to
you by legal evidence.

The charge here is, that the prisoner com-
passed and imagined the death of the king,
'and adhered to the kine's enemies; but that
is not enough, such is the care taken of the
lives of the subjects— It is not enough to
charge the offence fgenerally, but the particu.>
lar overt act must be set out, and it must k>e
proved to enable the jury to find a verdict
agfunat the prisoner, aikl that he may come
prepared with evidence to meet that fact|
which is tlie eround of the principal charge. ,

Thus, gentlemeftj you perceive, that to sup-
port the charge against the prisoner, we must
prove by sumcient evidence some one overt
act laid in the indictment; if any one of
thpse overt acts be established, you must find
a verdict against the prisoner, though we fai)
in supporting all the others.

Gentlemen, in support of this charge, there
are thirteen overt acts laid in the iooictment.
—I shall briefly state them. The overt acU
laid are the same in both counts of the in-
dictment.

The first overt act i^, that the fwisoner be-
came a member of a society formed for the
purpose of assistins the French in case they
should invade this Kingdom, and that he did
meet with other false traitqrf to deliberate
upon the means of effecting that purpose.^I
will not consume time by minutely, observing
upon each overt act : there is no man so duH
as not to understand this overt act:- -to en-
courage the king's enemies to invade the
kingdom is a proof of adhering to the king^s
enemies.

T^ second overt act is the same in sub*
stance with the first.

The third is, that he consulted and agreed

104t] 38 6£0RGB ItL

with others to send one or more persons into
France as agents, to invite the persons exer-
cising the ftowers of government there to in-
vade this kingdom.

The fourth is for collecting sums of money
to pay the agents vrho were or should be sent
into France — to pay and roaintsdn persons
who should be seduced from his majesty's
forces, and persons charged with crimes and
confined in prison.

The fifth is, sending four persons to France
to invite the French to invade Ireland^ and to
aid them when thev should arrive.

The sixth is nearly the same with the other,
to raise money.

The seventh is, that the prisoner consulted
with others to raise and levy war and rebel-
lion within the kingdom.

The eighth is,. that he met forty-eight per-
sons, and consulted with them upon the
means of attacking the kine*s ordnance stores
in the castle of Dublin, and to seize upon the
arms there deposited,' and appointing certain
persons to view three particular places, men-
tioned in the indictment, adjoining to the ord-
nance, in order to consider and report, where
there were proper places for making such
attack. Gentlemen, to state this overt act is
sufficient to explain, that it is evidence of
tftsason in both counts, no words can make it
stronetr ; men assemble together, 'and do
Consult, and send some of their members to
view the stores and to consider, where an at-
tack should be made upon the stores, to
enable the society to seize upon them, to
make war upon the king, and to aid the
French."

' The ninth overt act is, that the prisoner
did join with others for the purpose of aiding
the French. ,

• The tenth is, that he did with others meet
and agree to procure the French to invade Ihis
kingdom with ships and armed men.

^ 'The' eleventh is, that he did agree to raise
insurrection, rebellion and war within the
kingdom.

The twelfth is much of the same import,
and the thirteenth is, that he did agree to
support the French in case they should in-
vade the kingdom.

* ' You are now apnrized of the charges agunst
the prisoner, and the particular overt acts laid
in support of those charges, some one of
which must be cTearly and sati8ftu:torily
jprovod to induce you to give a verdict against

It is now my duty to state the facts and the
evidence, that will be adduced to support the
charge, and in doin^ so, it is my intention to
lay before you purely the evidence stated to
me, and that without exciting your feelings in
any respect whatsoever— careful ngt to excite
yours, and anxious, I solemnly assure you, to
suppress mine.

* Gentlemen, it will appear, that there did
last siMiiraer,— I go no farther back,— exist in
ihii aty and kingdom, a society, styling itself

Trial of Patrick Finney

[104^

a society of United Irishmen—this society
was subdivided into an indefinite number of
societies: the members took an oath, upon
their beine admitted into any society, to keep
secret, ana not to give evidence against any of
their brethren.

These societies as they happened to g^vr
numerous by the admission of members,
divided themselves into what are allied Splits,
consisting of twelve, and each society elected
a treasurer and ' secretary. There were ia
every barony and certain other districts Ba-
ronial Committees, formed of the treasurers
and secretaries elected by each particular
subdivision ; and of each barony and district,
and to the Baronial Society or Committee,
the sub-societies did make reports of their
several transactions by their respective trea-
surers and secretaries, and receive through
their secretaries and treasurers the orders of
the Baronial ; from the Baronial Committees
were formed County Committees, to whom
the Baronial Committees made their reports,
and from whom the Baronial Committees re-
ceived orders, and from the CopnCy Commit-
tees, F1t>vincial Committees were folmed,
and 80 by gradation to a ^^ational Com^
mittee.

If I am rightly instructed, i^ will still ap-
pear, that the object of, these societies was
and is, to subvert the constitution, and that
the means intended to be used to eflect this
purpose were, to invite the French nation to
invade this, their native country, to organise
the people whom they should seduce to join
them, and to seize the arms of his majesty in
the stores, provided for the defence of the
kingdom.

Such is the general outline of this United
Society. I come to the more minute partis
culars of the present case ; and the iacts
which I shall state will appear throughout
to be connected in ever^r step with the state-
ment I have made of tlie nature of the
society.

A man of the name of James O'Brien upon
the SAth of April, 1797, was passing through
Thomas-street, in this city ; he met a man
who vras his acquaintance, named Hylaad,
standing at the door of one Blake, who kept
a public-house. The prisoner at the bar,
then, as I believe, a stranger to O'Brien, was
standing at the door ; Hyuind asked O'Brien
was he tip 9 — which is, I presume a technical
expression to signify that a man is a member
of the Society. They tried O'Brien by the
signs, whether he was or not They told liira,
that no man's life was safe, if he were not mp ;
and partkularly, the prisoner at the bar told
O'Brien his life would not be safe, if he were
not up ;— they desired O'Brien to g6 hito the
house, in a room of which dght people were
sitting : there, after some discourse O'Brien
was sworn to secrecy, and afterwards he was
sworn to that oath, which is called the oath
of the United Irishmen. Tbe^ talked much
of their strength— of the number of d^cq and

1049]

Jw Higk Treason.

A.' D. 1798.

[lOStr

arms presided in ▼arious parts of the king*
doniy iK> great as to render tbe attainment of
their object certain; and after much other
discourse, which it is unnecessary to state,
they adjourned their meeting to the house of
one Coghran, in New-market on the Coombe,
tft be hekl the neU Sunday, the 30th of April ;
they agreed, that the pass word to gain ad-
mittance at Coghran's, should be ^ Mr,
Gre«ii.'*— -And it appears (for the trade is at-
tended with some pro6t) that O'firien was
called upon to pay, and did pay the prisoner
•06 shilling for swearing him.

As soon as 0*Brien iefl the house, and
escaped the danger hfe imagined he was in, he
went to Mr. ifiggins, a magistrate of the
QuecH*s ooanty, to whom he was known, then
in Dublin, and disclosed to him what had
passed. Mr* Higgins told O'Brien he was
right to reveal the matter, and brought him to
md Portarlington, who brought him to one of
tfhe committee rooms of the House of Lords,
where he was examined by one of the lord
lientenaatV secretaries. It was thought ex-
pedient, that attention should be paid to this
socie^, seeing its dangerous tendency, in
wder to counteract the desi^s entertained.
O'Brien conceiving that he might be in some
ckuiger from a. society formed upon such
principles, was advised to enlist in one of the
regiments of dragoons then quartered in Dub-
lin, and to attend the society to learn their
designs. With this view, O'Brien attended
at Coghraa^s house, in New-market, and was
admitted upon giving the pass-word, ** Mr»
Grten," lie there found the prisoner at
ilie bar with forty others assembled ; be was
desired to pay sixpence io the funds of the
society; he said, be had not then sixpence ;
they told him he was to return in the evening,
and that it made no diflference, whether he
then paid or brought it in the evening. —
Finney informed him and the society that the
money collected was Co constitute a fund for
the purposes of the society, that upon that
day there was to be a collection from the
United Societies in Dublin, sixpence from
each man, and that there was to be collected
4hat evening from the various societies,
10,000 sixpences; and he farther informed
them (for he was an active man at that
meeting) that there was to be a great funeral,
that of one Ryan, a mill-wright, whose corpse
lay at Pimlico, which was to be attenaed
by all the societies in Dublin ; that after the
funeral, that particular society was again to
assemble at the same place, Coghran's.

Gentlemen, O'Brien did, according to the
.directions he received, attend the funeral of
Rjran at Pimlico, and at the funeral the
prisoner was most particidarly alert and ac«
-tive, and macsballed the persons who at-
tended it. • The -witness will inform you of
thmr numbers; they appeared to Kim so
great, that lie (to use his own expression)
never before saw the like : he attended the
Jimcral thsoMgh several streets, but .appre-

hending, that an attack would be made by th6
military to disperse them, he took ^e first
bpportunitv to retreat. In the evening he
attended, he returned to Cochran's; he had
in the mean time seen his wife, and procured
sixpence from her, and pakl it upon the table,
upon which he saw considerable sums^ sold
and silver, and bank-notes t he saw otner
members brine money from the other so-
cieties, and tne prisoner was particularly
active in collecting the money ana in guiding
the business of the meetine.

At this meeting, it will appear^ that the
prisoner openly read an account of aims and
mone^r and men, that were provided by thd
societies, and he then informed the society^
that the Frefach were to land in Ireland, and
were to be joined, or aided by the societies^
and some other partiailafs, too minute to
mention ; and the meeting adjourned to the
7th of M«^, to assemble at Tuite's, the Sheaf
of Wheat, in Thomas* street, and the pass-
word was to be << Captain FiaiL" O'Brien
went to Tuite*s on the 7th of May, and was
admitted on giving the pass-word; and there,
he will inform you, he found the prisoner
acting as secretary. There were present sixty
persons ; their number was so great, that ac-
cording to tbe policy of their institution, they
deteimined to divide themselves into five
splits, and thev elected treasurers and secre-
taries for each, the prisoner administered
what I may call an oath of office to the per-
sons so elected treasurers and secretaries.

At this particular meeting, you will find
the prisoner particularly active— here at his
desire four members then present were ap-
pointed to examine three particular places
contiguous to the ordnance stores, and to see
whether they were places from which an at-
tack might successfully be made upon the
stores; tnis meeting adjourned to the ensuing
Sunday, (for Sundays are the days chosen to
carry on this blessed work).— That particular
split of which O'Brien was a member ap-
pointed to meet at Halfpenny's in New.mar«
ket, and there that split did meet accordingly
upon the t4th of May. At that meeting re-
ports were made by several members, that
they had reviewed the three places contiguous
to the arsenals, pointed out at the meeting at
Tuite's, and that they found them proper
places for making the intended attack ; and
from that meeting that particular split ad-
journed to meet at the house of one Archbold
in Skinner's-allcv. There they were to meet
the ensuing Sunday, the Slst of May. Ac-
cordingly tncy did meet upon that day, and
there Finney was present ; Halfpenny, who
was one of the officers of this particular split,
read a state of the fortes and arms. And
upon the next day 33nd of May, O'Brien the
secretary of his split (and thereby privileged
to attend the Baronisl meeting) was intro-
duced by Finney, and did' attend the Baronial
meeting in KinK-slrcet. At this Baronial
meeting there did attend forty-four members,

1051) S8 GEORGE IH.

delegiOed from the variout torlellBSy wHhia
tlie bafosy or dislrict to which thai coamiittce
beloDsod. There O'BrieD wms broo^ht, and
intnNniced by Finney, tbey bavins g^en the
Msa-wordy which was ** Mr. B^ring/*'-^
Tbeie be waa aworn inla affice ; and there
the secrelartea from the various societies did
deliver b TerbaUy, an account or statoment
of their societies and of their numbers^ and
Finney asade an entry or meraoranduai of
the sereral reports thus made by the officers
of the sub- societies to that meeting, and to
thb Baronial committee sums of mon^r were
brought, and delivered to the prisoner and a
penon named Fox. Much converaation
passed al Ihb meeting. It will apjpear, as
amicable to two of the overt acts, tnal Fin*
oey did declare the purpose for whieh the
money was eolleeted: he did state that hat
persons had been sent into France from the
society of United Irishmen, for the mirpose of
inviting the French to invade this iiinfldom ;
that two of these penons had returned^ that
the remaining two had continued in France, in
order to attemi the French when th^ should
invade this country, and that the money was
eolleeted for the purpose of paying tlie ex«
vcnces of those agents, thus stated by him to
nave been sent into Fiance ; and to maintain
the persons, who should desert from the
king's troops, and the members of the society
imprisoned under charges of having commit-
ted offences against the laws ; he did assure
the persons surrounding him, very solemnly,
of the truth of his statement, and in order to
procure farther credit to a statement so ins-
portent, be called upon Fox to make oath of
the truth of it, and Fox did thereupon swear
to the truth of what Finney had informed
them, that emissaries had gone to France, and
that the French were to invade this kingdom,
and that he had this account from another,
who swore to its truth ; and farther, with a
view to the attainment of this olyect, he did
state, that two vessels had arrived from
France with arms, to arm the people, mem-
bers of these societies.

Gentlemen, I have stated, that the Baronial
meetings are inferior to the County meetings.
It will appear that at this meeting, the mem-
bers present were informed, that thev would
not meet upon the next Monday, which I sup-
pose was generally the day appointed for the
Baronial meetuig, for that a county meeting
was to be had upon that day, and therefore
the Baronial meeting must stand over to
Tuesday. Accordingly tbey agreed to meet
at the house of Mrs. White, in Meath^street,
and the pass-word was ^ Mr. Patrick.** —The
narticulars of that meeting will come better
from the mouth of the witness. It will ap-
pear that some inquiry was made, respecting
the phhce of being supplied with eonttUutioHtf
and other papers. Places were mentioned
where to appW, and a person of the name of
Jackson, a founder in Church-street, was
mentioned, as being furnished with abun-

^PMAFkmey

[IQSe

dam» of tbem, and thai tber wQuUl be deli*
vered there to persons qualified to receive
them. It will app^ear, that a proposition was
made at this meeting, and debaiedb (or assas-
sinating aU penons who should give informs*
tioh against members of these societies.

However, befoe this meeting broke up, a
peace-officer, who had info^matiol^ through
the meana of CBrien, of the aoeeting at this
place, came for the purpose of apprehending
the conspirators there assembled. O^Bnen
had communicaAed the pass-word to the ma-
gistrate. The woman of the house, or the
waiters^ perceived the approach of the officer,
and those by whom he was attended, and a
suspicion waa entertained of the intentkm to
arrest the persona assembled. The waiter
came into the room, and said there were
strangers about the place, and cautioned them
to ti3ce care of themselves. — ^Finnear catted
upon the other members to deliver their pa-
pers to him, which tbqr accordingly did, and
ne left the room before the officer entered, and
he had the good fortune to escape with the
papers. The peace*officer and major Sirr,
town-migor, arrived immediately after, and
found every thing according to the infotam-
tion which O'Brieu had siven. They arrested
the persons there assembled ; Fim^y had es-
caped ; but that escape has, contrary to what
he expected, tended only fully to confirm the
account given by O'Brien. In a day or two
afler, Finney appeared in a public-house, in
which were two soldiers ; one, a corporal of
the Kildare militia, of the name of Thompaon,
the other of the name of Clarke. One of these
persons only survives ; he will give vou an ac-
countthat, in their presence, Finney boasted of
hisclevemessy orgood fortune in escapingfiem
the meeting, at wliich his companions were
arrested, and that he carried ott the papers.
One of these men, Thompson, immediately
went to the pioquet guard, and brought them
to the house where Finney was, and liad
him arrested ; thus, from Finney's mouth the
whole evidence which had been given by
O'Brien was confirmed. Fioncr^ was arrested
in the month of May lastt that bo has not
been tried before is not to be imputed to the
crown ; we were ready to try him, but he
postponed his trial from time to time; but I
will say no more upon that subject.

We will produce O'Brien, migor Sirr, lord
Portarlington, and Ckrkethe soldier of tiie
Kildare militia. We cannot produce corporal
J'hompson ; he made his examination or the
facts I have stated : he cannot give evidence
offsets; for he has been since wssaSBimtfd —
Such, briefly, is the evidence that will be
offered to you. You have an awful and a sa-
cred dutv to discharge. Yours is the duty
which will decide upon that man's life^ and \)m
Court is engaged in the same du^ in another
respect. We, even we, who are in this humble
station, I mean the counsel for and against
the prisoner, are engaged in some decree ia
the discharge of the same duty* It is our

1053]

fir Ihgh Treason*

JL U 1798.

[1054

duty for the crawn to lay the case fairly and
clearly before you. It is the duty of the
counsel for the prisoner to see thsit the man
charged with this atrocious crime shall have a
£ur trial, and if he be mnocenty that his inno-
cence may be made apfNurent. It is not our
dutv or desire to hare innocent men found
nmty; and I am confident it is neither the
duty, nor the wish of the counsel for the pri-
soner^ if he be guilty, that he should escape.
The counsel for the prisoner sarely must have
the same vish with ourselves, that for the
safe^ of the state, the guilty shall be found
{;uiHy ; and for the sake of the prisoner, if
nmocent, that he should escape. It is as far
from ihem to wioh that the ^ilty shoQld es-
cape, as it is from us that the innocent should
he found guilty.

You, gentlemen, have, I sav, a sacred duty
to discharge ; you will not he led from the
laithfttl dischaige of that duty, diber by an
abhorrence of the crime, or a tenderness to
the criminal. You will do your duty to the
atate and to the prisoner. It is of the last
consequence to the kingdom and to eveiy in«
dividual protected bVUielaws, that a crime
of this nature should not eo unpunished ;
your hearts will inform you, that theenormitf
of the crime ought not to affect your minds
in considering the prisoner's guilt. We will
call our witnesses, and it must be a satisfac-
tion to everjr mind to £nl, that cool and im-
partial justice will be administered between
the crown and the prisoner upon this import-
ant occasion.

3ame» 0*Brien sworn.

Bo you itadlcctthe 85th of April last?*-
I do.

Do you recollect being in Thomas-etreet P
—I do : passing through on the fi5th of April,
I met a man of the name iof Uyland at the
door of one Blake, a publican.

Did any thing pas^ and what, hetween ^foa
and Hyland?— 1 nad a slieht knowledge with
him three months helore uunugh friencb from
the same place: he asked me did I hear from
the country^?— -«

Was thtte aByepcrson presentor in hearing
at the time Hyland spmce to you?— There

Do you know a .penon 4gf 4he name of
PatrickiFimiiy?-^! dio; I knew him that day,
and since.

'.Look abont^ andssy if vou see Jrim I— That
Is the man [pmmingito4he prisoner].

Point him out to'thejinyf-o^hat is the
man ; he 'Jcadws me well.

He was present and .wnthin liearing, ivfaen
Ilyland spoke to yon ?-*He atas.

What didffyUmll aayf .*-He made signs
which Leameaifterwacds to understand.

What did he say, after he made the signs f
•-«^it:i^ aswaader yeuase aot l^, James T

Was that in the hearing of Finney?— It
■ran.

What passed, or was any observation made
by any person upon that ?— There was.

What was lt?-~I asked him the eense of
being Up^ for I did not understand it

What was said then ? — Finney inunedisAely
told me, the sense was, to become a United
Irishman, or if not I might lose my iifis be*
fore I went half a street.

Was thefe any proposal, and what, then
made to you? — I tola him, I dul not under-
stand him; he told me to gp into the house,
Blake's, and I should know the .particulars.

Did you go m P— I did.

Was there any body but Finney in the room
into which you went?— There was; these
were ten when I went in. There were two
men.; 1 have since come to learn their names.

What hai^ned towards yourself after you
went into tne room ? — A man of the name of
Bnckley asked Finney, ** Have you caught a
bu-d?" ^YcB/' said Finoey. Then said
Buckley, <' He shall never leave this, tili I
make a Christian of him." Then said he,
<< Do yiAi, Lewis, mind that door, and I will
mind this."

What passed then ? was any oath admi-
nistered P—There vras.

By whom ?— Hyland told me, that I should
take an oath, not to discover an^ thing that
passed, or to give evidence against any one
there, and then I would be farther enlightened.

Was there any oath administered by the
prisoner? — ^There was afterwards.

Who swore you first to secrecy f*— Hyland
did.

Was there any other oath administered P-«
There was.

By whom ? — Hyland laid the book upon the
table, and said, turning to Finn^, ** I caiv>
not repeat the test oath off; if not, you have
a printed one i^Knit you." Fiuney then chew
out a printed paper, and Hyland said, ^* Do
you repeat after me," and I was sworo.

Clan you tell the purport of that oath?—
As nearly as I recollect, I will tell it.

Do so.— The purport of the oath to which
he swore me, as well as I can reoolleet, was,
" That I i^ottki persevere to endeavour to
form a brotherhood of aflfection amone Irisfak
men of every religious penuasbn, and Decsjs*
vere to endeavour to gain aiidl, equal, and
adequate representation of all the people in
Ireland/"

Was there any more ?-*-Thepe was : ^* That
neither fears^ hopes, rewards, or punishments,
ahould ever mduce me, directly or indirectly,
to discover en, or give any evulence agabisl
him, them, or any other similar societies, for
any act or expression of their's, done or made
coUeetiv^, or iadividnaUy.eitherinor out
of this soaety." That, I believe, finished-it.

A^this^ did you getany information with
regard lothe«gnsP-^I wastold fayihe ori-
aonerafter the oath, thateveiy person, wiie-
ther poor or rich^ that was not a United Irish*
man, mwid lose their Uves.

Pray now, (yBrien, what was tl induced
you, or did you take that oath vtrfimtat Uy^ or
ffom«pprehensioi»?'*-Hetear9edmeithe siga^
that I might make myself known, .

1065] 38 GEORGE III.

■ Did you Uke the oath voluntarily, or from
fear?— I did it from fear of tho words lie said,
when he was joined by every one in the room,
and they had got, one to one door, and an-
other to another. Yourself might be afraid,
if you were there.

Did you pay any money there ?— I did.

To whom?— I paid a shilling to the pri-
soner; he said, tnat was the rule for every
man sworn, to subsist the cause.

Were there other meetings appointed?—
There were ; after Finney catechised me in
the sijgns and words ; I s^all mention them if
you choose : He t6Id, the challenge was, to
draw the right hand across the left breast, and
the answer was to put the left hand upon the
right wrist; then two words were spoken,
** Go on;" and the answer by the opposite
person was, '' To whatT The person replied,
" to truth, union, and liberty." Then the
ri^t hand was offered by one person, and
the left given by the other, then they shook
hands.

After this, was there any day appointed for
a future meetine ? — He said we should meet
to be farther enlightened in the business, at
the widow Coghran*s, 47, Newmarket on the
Coombe, comer of Fordam Valley.

Pray did you get any token, or word, by
which to get admission? — He told me to eo
at six or seven in the evening, and to asK,
<* b Mr, Green here 9" and I would be admit-
ted to the United Irishmen, or brothers, who
were there;

Was there any conversation aboiH their
strength, number, or arms?— There was, at
Blake's, in Thomas-street

When you were sworn ? — ^There was a print-
ed paper, the sense of which was, that all
place-men and pensioners, not United Irish-
men, were to lose their lives.

After this had passed, what did you do on
that day?— After it had passed, I went home
to my own place iirst ; and I could recollect,
through my recollection and understanding,
to hear of people being taken as " Defenders,^
and in that line; and I immediately set my
opinion, that I had better discover wliat had
happened to me.
t Did ypu discover ?-*-I dkL

To' whom ?— To captain Higgins, a magist
trale, who is acquainted with me.
. What country gentleman is he?-— Queen's
county, from Mount Mellick. I went to him
at Mr. Prendergast's, where he was; I do not
know what street, but one end leads into
Golden-lane.

: Cfliirl.-^What countiyman are you?—
Queen's county.

What did Mr. Higgins advise you to do? —
When I apprized him of the speeches

Mr. JM^JWi^.--»Was Mr. Finney present?--.
No. . ' . .

Where did Mr. Higgins bring you?— He
brought me to lucd PortarUngton.

Were you brought any where afterwards ?-«
I was not brought any where; I walked vo-
luntarily. ....

Trial of Patrick Finney

[1056

Where did you go to? — We went to lord
Portarlington's house, and he went with ua
to the parliament house, where I told what
had passed.

Cour^.— What do you mean by telling what
passed ?^I told him what had happened at
Thomas-street, my being sworn i% and the
declarations that were made of the place-men
k)sing their property, if they were net United
Irishmen.

You enlisted in some regiment of dragoons
afterwards?.-! did, in the 9th regiment of
draffoons, for my own protection.

With what colonel?— Colonel Ilenniker.

How soon after you were swoni ?— The day
after, beeau^ I dkl not know what to do : I
recollected Hanlon*s * having eiven informa-
tion against some persons, and tlutt he went
into the artiUery, who protected him ; and E
determined in my own breast to enlist, and
that I would have the protection of the regi-
ment.

» You talked of an appointment for the Sim-
day after ?— There was : I made known at tlie
parliament house something of the funeral
and the great meeting, and was asked, whe->
ther there was any thmg in the coffin? I said
I could not tell.

[This examination was objected to by the
counsel for the prisoner.]

Did yon go any where upon the Sunday af-
ter?—I did.

Where?— To Coghvan's, New-market upon
the Coombe.

Mr. Curran.— I do not know that the
learned coutisel is aware that New-market is
in the county of Dublin: I understand that
the entire market is in the counhf of Dublim
This indictment is in the etiy, and it needs
not any information or assertion from roe to
satisfy you, that until an overt act be proved
in the city, you can give no evidence of what
passed in the county.

• Mr. Prime Setfeani, — Then I will postpone
for the present what passed in the county.

You gave me an account of Thomas- street
Do you know the Sheaf of Wheat? — I was
there the Sunday after I was at New-maricet,
Sunday the 7 th of May.

Was any word given to introduce you there ?
** Mr. Fkil" was the word.

Now tell me what passed there. — ^I got in
upon the word « Mr. Flail."

Did you siee the prisoner al the bar at that
meeting? — I did see him at the meeting, and
when the .meeting closed.

Were there many persons there ?'r-There
were sixty men in the rdom.

Gour/.— Whose house was it .'--Tuite's.

Mr. Curran,*^ wish Mr. Prime Serjeant
to mention the particular overt act to whitb
he applies this evidence. - •

Mr. Frime SeryeafU.^ThtLt must be done

• > • •

* See the tnal of Glennan and others^ mU^y
p. 437.

1057]

fof High Treason.

by Ihoee who speak to evidence, or by the
Coart« I produce the witDess to prove evei^
individual overt act in the indictment ; and if
the statement be founded, he will certainly
prove them.

Mr. Curran, — ^Tbere are thirteen overt acts
in the indictment. AAer the last objection I
made, the Court will see with what view I
interfere doW| and bow necessary it is we
should know what act this witness comes to
prove.

Mr. Prime Serjeant. — I declare, that from
the infonnatio&s I have of this man, he will
prove them all. It will be for the Court and the
Jury to apply the evidence.— Was the number
of the persons counted ^-^I counted them.

Did any body else? — Finney and Tom
Cooke, a yeoman, who is not here.

Was any thing said upon that ?^-It was ad-
vised between tliemboth, that there being
too many, they should.be divided into splits.

Court, — ^Who ptoposedit? — Finney, as se-
cretary of the meeting; and Cooke, as chair-
man, or president.

Do you say thai Finney was secretary of
the meeting? — He was secretary, my lord.

You said they were divided ? — There was a
sheet of f«iper got in, and No. 1, to 60, put
in it, and it was cut up in pieces, and thrown
into a hat, and every one drew, and each man
was to follow the split of \% that he was to
draw.

What number did you draw ? — ^I drew 38.

Court, — I suppose tbeve were ao tickets put
into the bat? — ^Therewere; tliat was to de-
termine what split a man should belong to ;
he was to fall , into whatever 13 he should
draw.

Was there any officer elected for each
split ?~TThere was: there was a room hard by,
into which every twelve went, until they
elected a secretary and cash-keeper, which
lefl ten members.

Court. — ^Did they go into the room?— I
went in with my own split

Did they go in, in the order of their num-
bers r — ^I do not know of any but my own
split; I cannot tell what passed while others
were there.

Did yod elect a secretary and casb-kceper?—
We did.

What was done after that?-* We came into
the large room all together.

The wkhole sixty ? — ^Yes.

What happened there ? — ^The secretaries
that were elected were ordered to attend their
meetings, and have candle-light near the door
that if a stranger came, they might know him,
lest any one should impose upon the meeting.

AfUr the election of secretaries, and cash-
keepers was there any oath administered, and
by whom? — Tbe five secretaries an^five cash-
keepers were ordered to sit near the chair, by
the prisoner. — ^The five secretaries were' sworn
to the secretary's oath, and the five cash-
keepers to the treasurer's oath.
CoMr*.— By whom ?— By Finney and Cooke,
VOL. XXVI.

A. D. 1798. [1058

who afterwards raised a glass of punch and sai(^
'< IfWi 17 domn with tkii:'

Can you tell the oath ?— 1 believe I can, a
part of both :— " That as long as he held the
office of secretary he would not give any papers,
copies, or documents to any man not part of
the split.

What was the oath of the cash-keeper?—
" That he should not embezzle or put astray
any of the cash given him in charge, but to
make a just return to the Baronial Meeting."
After all this had passed, swearing and wash^
ing down, do you recollect any conversation
about White's-court ?— I do very well.

What was it : Tell the Court and Jury ?-t
Cook struck the table with a carpenter's rule
he had, and called to order, every man to keep
silence. When every man kept silence, ** Gen-
tlemen," said he, " I haveone thing to disclose,
with your leave," turning to Finney, Finney
said, " There was time enough," so Cook said,
" It must be disclosed now; you must all go,"
said he, " as you knowyourrespective times of
meeting, to White's-court in Ship-street, to
No. 48, George's- street, and the Stone-cutter's
yard in the same street, round from Stephen's-
strcet."

Was it told for what purpose ?— The busi-
ness was introduced in the purpose of viewing
these places, to see how they could get into
the back of the ordnance stores, to rob it of
arms and stores, ball and powder, without loss
of blood, as they did not like to face the
guards.
Who said this ?— Both Finney and Cooke.
Was there any objection made to that pro-
posal ? — ^None that I heard.

Was it agreed to ?— Every man was asked
to put out his hand, which he did.

Was it appointed, that you should meet
again? — ^The secretary and cash-keeper of the
split I was allotted in, said, we were to meet
at Halfpenny's, atNewmarketon the Coombe.
For what time ?— The Sunday after.
Cour^— What was his christian name?— ;
Ignatius : he was our secretary.
Secretary of your spUt?— Yes, my lord.
You met them?— I went to Halfpenny's
the Sunday af\er, and I would not be let in
without the word.

Court, — ^Was there any signal ?— The pass-
word was " Did the Woolpack pan i»y," they
being mostly broad weavers.

Mr. Curran. — Are you going to give evi-
dence of what passed at Halfpenny's?
, Mr. Prime Serjeant. — I am.
Mr. Curran.— My lords, as to the law there
is not the least doubt. It is clearly settled,
that unless an overt act be proved in the
county where the indictment is laid, the pro-
secutor cannot go into evidence in a foreign
county. There can be no doubt of that :— wc
have the books in court, and can read pas-
sages to that effect. The only doubt is with
reg^d to the application of the rule here. I
am to contend, that there is not evidence for
a jury of any overt act of high treason in the
3 Y

10S01 38 GEORGE UI.

city. There cTumot be evidence of an overt
act, unless the evidence, if believed, would be
sufficient to convict. What is the evidence
here?— He has stated a meeting and a propo-
sal to see whether there might not be a rob-
bery committed upon his majesty's stores
without blgods^ed, and without opposing his
majesty's forces.

Mr. Justice CAdmWr/afit.— We will give an
opinion, if forced to it; but after the state-
ment of the counsel for the crown, they can
be under no difficulty ia going farther^ and
postpone this part for the present.

Mr. SolicUor GeneraL^ln lord Preston's
case, the only act proved was taking boat at
Surrey stairs, and that let in evidence Of what
passed in Middlesex.*

Mr. Baron Smith,— We have so much in
prospect that the less time there is wasted in
ar^ment the better.

Mr. Prime Serfeant. — T shall go to another
overt act. Do you recollect being at Skinner's
alley, at one Archbold'sP— I do very well, the
Sunday after.

[Here it was objected that Skinoer'a-alley was
also in the county.]

Do you know North King-street^-*! was
there.

Was Finney there?— He was the man
brought me there.

Do you recollect how soon after you left
ArchboM's?— It was the Monday evening
followinz. He scolded the secretar^r and cash*
keeper there for admitting me, without ad-
ministering an oath to me upon my election.

Was any account retnmed ?— There was.
Finney swore me to the cash-keeper's oath,
and one Hyland to the secretary's.

Tell what was done ?— After I was sworn,
every secretary and cash-keeper should an-
swer according to thdr «mml>er, beginning at
21. The secretary was asked the number of
men ; and Finney made an entry in the book
6f the cash and the numbers, and when a
member swore in a man, he was td give an
accotmt of what he belonged to, and the num-
ber of men

Cotirf.— What number of men ?^The num-
ber of men that each secretary and cash-
keeper had under them, for this was a Baro-
nial meeting.

This was a Bardnial meeting?-— It was, of
Secretaries and cash-keepers.

There was an account given of each, and
the number of men ?— Tliere was, and of
arms.

Who received the cash at the meeting?—
Finney did.

Was there any and what conversation, with
regard to the purpose for which the money
was received, and by whom ?— There was.

By whom, and whatjwas it?— There were
forty-five men in the room, secretaries and
cash-keepers, every two men answerhig one

• SccVolW, p. 727.

Trial qfTairicM Finnijf

fi060

nimiber : Finney was asked Uie pivpose to
which the cash was to be applied; he answered
to pay the men as they haa done before^ to <go
to France.

For what purpose ?— For the Purpose of
letting the men in France know the state of
the men in Ireland, and of their iateonion to
Join them at their landing.

Cbicff.— There was a rstum of men and
arms, did you say at that Baronial meetioe f
— ^There was a return of cash by each cash-
keeper, which was paid over to Ffnoey, and
there was a return of men and arms.

What fiuther did he say abcot the persons
being sent into France ?— He told me that he
got Information that day (he tokl the whole
meeting as well as me) that two of the four,
who were last sent into France* had oomc
back, and that the F^nch would certainly
come again, and that die other two remained
to come with the fleet

Was there any County meeting mentioned
that day ?— There was. .

Who mentioned it? — FilMeydid: he told
us, they could not meet on the Monday, but
might on Tuesday, as he was obliged to att^
a connty meeting.

Court. — ^Were the Baronial neetines on
Monday ?— The one i sat in was i^pea AIoii-
days, another met upon Tuesdays.

Was there one Fox at that neetiog? —
There was.

Did he say any thing in ^e presence of
Finney f — Finney had mentioneo the use of
the money, for deserters^ and persons in gaol,
and the return of the two persons from France,
and then he called upon rm, and asked him,
i f i t was not true. Fox took a book out of hh
pocket, and swore It was true, as it was sworn
to him by another man die same day.

Was there any farther meeting appealed f
«— Theie was.

For what day und place ?-— T\MSday dght
days.

What plase ?— Mrs. Winters, 44, Meatb-
Ytreet, and the pass-word was to be, '' It Mr.
Ptttrkk here,** She kept the sign of St.
Patrick, and it was thought the members
would not forget the word, when they looked
at the sign.

Do you recollect any thing else to have
'been said by Fox in the hearing of Finney?-^
That every person wanting constitutions or
returns was to call at Fox's place, IB, or 19,
Hampiond-lane, and he would supply them.

Did you ever call upon Fox in consequence
of that?— I did:

TeH what piesedP«^I went up stairs to
where be lived : be brought me to a back-
yard and in a bole in tHie wall he todc out
papers, n^ich he showed me, that I ti^lgllt
give a copy of U.

Mr. 5r AttWy.- 1 hope the cmmifel 4bf the
crown do not mean to give parol evidence of
tbe^e papers.

iri/Tie**.— Itook the paper and had ittHI
Cook took it from me.

lOflJ]

Jw Htgh Treas0tt0

A. D. 1798.

[loes

H« gww jr«i a retiirn and a coostitulioD f —
He gate ma a return, and Ihe conslUulion
waa oobmwImjK blotted, and I atkedfor mo*
tiier; ha 6aid lie tMul npt another till we
ahould go to Jackson's in Church-street. We
went there, and saw a tall man in brown
clothes with a black sallow complexion. He
gave Fox twelve, and be. gave me one.

Cmiri4 — ^What do you call a constitution?
—A book having the test oath, and the
secretary's oath, aad the cash- keeper's, and
the raies of the society.

Mr. Prime Serjeani, — My lords, I now go
back to Ihe county of DubliD, and hope the
intimatwa from the Court will have the offset
intended.

Mr. Justice VhamhirlaiiU'^Uvfe the coun-
sel for the prisoner any objection to their
going to this evidence }

Mr. Curran. — I have, my lords, and wish to
know, whether the witness has done as to the
parts he has testified; that he may not, after
my objection, supply any thine by saying he
omitted any expressum, which ne forgot.

Mr. Justice vhamberiain, — ^We do not give
afiy opinion upoa the law now ; but we wish
for the sake of perspbuity, tint you would
finish in the city.

Mi. Prime Serf€atii.^A have no objection
to accommodate the Court; but it, may be
drawn into example hereafter.

Mr. Justice Chati^ferlain. — You must then
supportyour^oljeeti<m, Mr. Curran.

Mr. CttfTan. — My lords, there is no doubt
as to the law, that an overt act must be esta-
blished in the comity where the indictment
is found, before evidence of an overt act in a
foreien coun^ can be received. I take it to
be cTear law, that some overt act must be
cle«4y proved, if the evidence be credible,
in the proper county, such as wouM com-
pletely establish an overt act in the indict-
ment See what the evidence is; — ^the only
overt act to which the evidence can ap*
ply, is that of levying money to send per-
sons into France to invite the French to in-
vade this country. There is evidence of an
overt act of a difier«it kind. I admit it is an
overt act of treason to give material informal
Cion to an enemy at'vmr. There is no occasron
to eite eases :— 'Heasey*^' case* is directly in
point Preston's case is in point. Therefore
my cAiiecUon is this, that the evklence given
is evidence of a distinct kind of overt act, an
estsMisfaed overt act of iKasoni clearly known
to the law. The overt act in this indictment
is, that the ^soner levfed money to send
messengers 'to 'France tolnvite them to invade
tlus country; the evidence is not that, but
tluit messengers had been uM in consequence
of a previous determinatien on the part of
kVance to invade this country ; alludmg to
the notorious event of th^r coming to Bimtry

Mr. Prime Serjeant .'-^'Do your IdrdslHps
think f^oeeessary^br meto say a word?

.* *i

MkMMI

• Ante, Vol. 19, p, 1341.

Bfr. Jnstice CAemler^in.— We are of opt-

nion, that there is evidence to go to the juryi
and unless tiiere be no evidence Mr. Curran
himself admits \b9X his objection falls to the
^ound. We think there is evidence of the
several overt acts, and particularly of the first,
that the prisoner associated with others under
the denomination of United Irishmen^ with
design and for the purpose of aiding and as-
sisting the persons exercising the powers of
(government in France, in case they should
mvade this kingdom. Now we think there
is evidence, if credited, to support that. Here
are oaths proposed—^ society is formed;
olearly, the purpose of this society is en*
quirable into, and the same witness discovers
at subsequent meetings, that they had sent
persons into France to inform the French of
the state and number of persons inclined to
assist them, and ready to join them. Is not
this evidence to go to a jury to show the pur*
pose of this association, if the jury believe itf
Then there is ovidence in the city of Dublin
of a plan to attack the ordnance stores. Is
it not for the jury to inquire for what purpose
that attack was to be made, and may it not
be coupled with the expressions of the pri-
soner, that persons had been sent into France
and some of them had returned? The jury
coupling the fovming of the association witn
the plan to attack the Ordnance, are to see^
whether all this was done for the purpose
laid in the indictment, of adhering to and
assisting the French, if they should land. I
do not say, what the jury will intend upon
this evidence ; but I think they may intend,
that these proceedings were for the purpose
of assisting the French.

Mr. Barun Smith — It is sufficient for me to
say, that i entirely concur in the opinion de-
livared by Mr. Justice Cliiamberlain.

You told me, that you got into Coghrain^
by the word " Jlfr. Green.** Where is Cogh-
ran's ? — No. 47, New- market on the Cooml*e.'

You got in by the word " Mr. Green ?— I
did, by asking " Is Mr. Green here ?" '

Was the prisoner there P — He was.

CouW.^This was the Sunday after yoi(
were sworn P^-'It was Sunday the 25th of
April.

You were admitted?-— I was admitted up
stairs, and Finney introduced me to the merl
there as a true man and a brother, that ho
had sworn me himself.

What happened there ?— He asked me fo«
sixpence; I told him, I had it not; lie told
me to go to Pimlico that evening, and that
10,000 United Irishmen were to walk afler
the funeral of Michael Ryan, and that every
man of them was to pay sixpence. They were
to walk to show government their strength,
and what they were.

Did you go to that funeral?—! went home
first,and procured some money, and then went
to the funeral ; I walked as far as the Castle*
gate, and the guard being coming, I was
afraid I toight be killed as much as any man

1063] 38 GEORGE lU.

that deserved it ; for I was all that time giving
information.

Was the prisoner there ? — He was ; he was
making us walk four deep; and afterwards
he was making us walk six deep.
. Court, — You walked four deep?— Wc did,
four in a breast.

Who made you walk that way? — ^Finney;
and afler he saw the crowd too throng and he
made us walk six deep.

You went home?— I did, and got some
money* and went to Coghran's, and got in
upon the word, after the corpse was interred.
Fmney introduced me as before; that I was
a true man and a brother, for he had sworn
me himself. Then he demanded sixpence
from mc« as every man at the funeral had
paid sixpence for the good of the cause.

Did you see any more money there but
that sixpence? — Undoubtedly! did, both gold
and brass, and paper; men were coming in
and paying it, and he received it.

Court, — You saw notes and money? —
Notes and money, my lord.

Received by him ?— -Yes, brought in by dif-
ferent people and received by hhn.

Did he read any thing at that meeting? —
He did.

What was it?— He read the constitution,
the strength of men and arms in Ireland ; I
cannot recollect the strength of arms, but he
told me there was 111,000 men in the pro-
vince of Ulster.

Court. — You do not recollect the arms ? —
I do not; but he said th«re were two ships
arrived with arms and ammunition from
France.

Was there any meeting appointed for a
future day ?— There was.
.. Where?— Tuite's in in Thomas-street.

Was there any pass word?-^There was,
'* Mr, Flail*' '

Was there any meeting at Halfpenny's?—
There was.

At that meeting was Finney present?— He
was not.

You recollect what passed about examining
White's-court and George's*street ; what was
to be done afterwards? — We were to see how
it might be easy to get in without blood. What
opinion we formeo, we were to communicate
to the officers of each split, that they might
report it to the Baro jiial Committee, and that
they should report to the National Com-
mittee. '

Did you report it accordingly ?-~ We did,
and every one of the old split gave their opi.
nion, that it was a very good act, and could
easily be done, except five new members that
came in.

. Was there any other meeting appointed for
any other place ? — ^There was.

Where?— At Archbold's in SkinnerValley,
the pass word was to be " Harp^" because
Halfpenny had a harpsichord in the parlour,
where lie swore the five men, and played
some tunes upon it; therefore the pass. word .
was agreed to be « The Harp^f" j

Trial qf Patrick Fianeg

[1064

Wbal happened there?— -There were seven
new members sworn, which made us twenty-
four, and obliged us to have a ^lit that day.

Did you get any place in that split?— I
did.

What place ?— I was voted cash-keeper of
that split : I was only elected there, and was
sworn in at North Kmg>8treet, at the Baro-
nial Meeting. I told you that Finney bad
I scolded Halfpenny for letting me come to the
Baronial Meeting without being sworn.

^as there any benefit annexed to the office
of secretary or cash-keeper ? — They had.

What was it? — ^No other could go to the
Baronial Meeting but secretaries and cash-
keepers.

Did you go there to be sworn ln?^-No; I
did not know that I would be sworn, but
several of us went, and Finney, who was in a
great coat.

Jury.— Was Finney present? — He brought
me from Archbold's to !North King-street.

You recollect you said there was a meeting
appointed at Meath-street, and the pass-woiu
agreed upon was, '* Mr, Patrick f^ — ^I do : it
was agreed the meeting should not be till
the Tuesday eight days following.

You went to that meeting?— I did on the
Tuesday eifiht days following.

How did you get in ? — ^There were two men
on the s'tairs, and they both saw whether I
was catechised, to see whether I knew the
signs, although 1 had the pas»-word, '* Js Mr.
Patrick heref»

War Finney there ? — ^He was.

Was Cooke there ? — He was.

Was there any debate? — ^There was: Fin-
ney said as soon as they should all come in
they should be sworn not to make use of the
christian names of one another^ lest it might
lead to a discovery.

Was there any thing said, with regard to
persons who should give information? — ^There
was.

What was it ? — Cooke said, that any man,
who was only to be censured for giving in-
formation to government, should have his
eyes plucked out, his hands cut off, and hb
tongue cut out.

Court. — ^What do you mean by censured 9
— To tuppote they were giving information
against the party.

His hands were to be cut off ?-^They were,
the way he could not write ; and those who
gave evidence for government were to be
murdered.

Do you recollect any woman going into
the room?— No ; but I recollect she sent her
man in.

What did he say?-^The man said his mis-
tress had been looking out of the window,
and saw people watching about the hou3c and
desired us to take care. Finney immediate^
desired every one to give up the papers : he
got them all, put them into his bosom, and
he and another went across the table, «ui).go(
downstairs*^ ^ - -

* i

10663

for Mf^ Treoion.

A. D. 1790.

ri066

Did any body come in, or were any taken 7
—Every one of us were taken: sixteen.

Who came in P— Some gentlemen and
guards.

Tell the people who were taken? — ^There
was Cooke^ Halfpenny, Hartford, M^Cue,
Molony, Fhnn; I do not immediately reool*
lect any more of them.

Do you recollect who came in with the
guards ?"»I do»

Who ?— Major Sirr and captain Atkinson.

Had you given anv information to them P
— ^Not to Atkinson, but I had to major Sirr,
and some other gentlemen.

You recollect we meeting at Meath-street?
—I do.
. Was there any report ?— There was.

By whom ? — By Finney ; that there should
be no explosion among the United Irishmen
until such time as the French should come
either to England or Ireland, but they should
continue to swear in as many as they could,
and secrete all the arms and ammunition
they shoidd get.

Cross-examined.

Pray, Mr. 0*Brien, whence came you? —
Speaik in a way I will understand you.

Du you not understand me? — Whence? I
am here. Do you mean the place I came
from?

By vour oath, do you not understand it?—
I parUy censure it now.

Now that you partly censure the question,
answer it. Where did you come from r<^From
tlie Castle.

Do you live there?— I do while I am there.

You are welcome, Sir, to practise your wit
upon me. Where did you Uve before you
came to Dublin ? — In the Queen's county.

Wliat way of life were you engaged in be-
fore you came to Dublin ?— I had a farm of
land, whicli my father left roe, and I set it,
and afterwards sold it and came to Dublin to
ibllow business I learned before my father's
death : I served four years to Mr. Latouche
of Marley.

To what business ? — A gardener.

Were you an excise officer ? — No.

Nor ever acted as one ? — ^I do not doubt but
I ma^ have gone of messages for one.

Who was that?«-A man of the name of
FJtzpatrick.

He is an excise- officer ? — So I understand.

What messages did you go for him? — For
money, when he was lying on a sick bed.

To whom P-*-To several of the people in
his walk.

But you never pretended to be an officer
yoursell' ?— A& I have been walking with him,
and had clean clothes on me, he might have
said to the persons he met, that I was an
excise-officer.

But didyott ever pretend to be an officer ?—
1 never did pretend to be an officer.

Did you ever pass yourself foe a revenue-.
«fiiourP*-I answered that before.

I do not want to give you any imnecessary
trouble, sir ; treat me with the same resped
I shall treat you. I ask you again, did you
ever pass yourself for a revenue-officer?—
Never, barring when I was in drink and the
like.

Then, when you have been drunk, you have
passed for a revenue-officer?— I do not know
what I have done when I was drunk.

Did you at any time, drunk or sober, pass
yourself as a revenue officer ? — Never, when
sober.

Did you, drunk, or sober?--! cannot say
what I did when I was drunk.

Can you form a belief? I ask you open
your oath *. you are upon a solemn occasion :
did you pass yourself for a revenue officer? —
I cannot say what happened ta me when I
was drunk.

What? Do you say you might have done
it when you were dmnk ? — ^I cannot recollect
what passed in my drink.

Are you in the habit of bang drunk? —
Not now, but some time back I was.

Very fond of drink? — ^Very fond of drink.

Do you remember to whom you passed
yourself for a revenue officer? — I do not

Do you know the man who keeps the Red
Cow, of the name of Cavanagh ? — Where
does he live ?

Do you not know yourself? — There is one
Red Cow above the Fox and Geese.

Did you ever pass yourself as a revenue
officer there? — 1 never was there but with
Fitzpatrick; and one day, there had been a
scuffle, and he abused Fitzpatrick and threat-
ened him; I drank some whiskey there, and
paid for it, and went to Fitzpatrick amd told
nim, and I summoned Cavanagh.

For selling spirits without hcence ?— I did,
and compromised the business.

By taking money, and not prosecuting him?
—Yes.

Did you put money into your own pocket
by that?— I did.

But you swear you never passed yourself
for a revenue officer ?— Barring when I was
drunk.

Were you drunk when you summoned
Cavanagh ? — ^No.
' When you did not prosecute him ? — ^No.

When you put his money into your pocket ?
—No.

Do you know a man of the name of Patrick
Lamb?— I do not; but if you brighten my
memory I may recollect.

Did you ever tell any man, that you were
a supernumerary, and that your walk was
Rathfarnham and Tallagh?— I never did,
except when I was drunk. But I never did
any thing but what was honest, when I was
sober.

Do you believe you did say it ? — I do not
know what I might have said when I was
drunk. You know when a man is walking
with an exciseman, he gels a glass at every
house. '.

1003} 38 GEORGE III.

Mr. Cmtrmn^^l know no such tbiitg, 6ever
hslring walked wilfa an eicise-man.

Wilneu, — ^Then you may know it

Do you know an^ man paasme by the
naflMy or called Patrick Laraor-^Not that I
recollect upon my word.

Upon your oath? — ^I do not recollect, I
mean to tell every thing against myself^ as
against anv other.

Do you know a person of the same of Mar-
garet Moore? — ^Wnere does she live ? is she
married ?

She lives near Slradbally; do yoa know
her ?— I know her well ; I thought it roisht
beaaother; I was courting a woman of that
name. beilBie my marriage.

Did you come to Dublin before her, or
after ?'-*! was in Dublin before I knew her.

Did you ever get a decree against her? — I
didget a summons for money she owed me.

Vfere you taken lo the Court of Conaeience
by her ?— No.

Never ? — ^Never.

Did she pay you the money since?— No.
My brother and sister run a bill with her, and
my brsther gave a note, he being under age ;
and afterwards I took a house in Stradbally
and did not like making a noise before the
neidibettrsy and paid her nine guineas.

Was there any money refunded her by
Older of the Court?-— I do not know; she
lodged money for her security in the house
where she 1^, as a security for her return the
next day.

Were ymi rammonedf— No.

Nor paid any money ?•— No.

Did she pay anv money to any person? —
DoA'tl lellyeu she lodged money as a se-
ciiri^ till next di^.

When you met Hyland, were you a United
Irishman?—- AlwiQfS luulMBd to every honest

Trial ^Ptirkk Fkmy

[lOfiB

Were you a United Irishman ?— Never

Were you in any manner a United Irish-
man ticffote that di^ ?^Never sworn in before
tfwtday.

Were you in any manner?— Don't I teil
yoii,4hat I was onMM to every honest man.

Do you believe you are answering my
quesyotti— tdo.

Wore, you ever in any eobiety of United
Irishmen before that day ?— I do not at aU
knw^ybut I may, but without »y knowledge :
tlw mlshtbeinihenext boa to roc, or in the
end of the seat with me, and I not know

Wepe you ever In a society of Untied Iii^-

len but <hat dsy ?— I was since.

Were you ever of their meetings, or knew
anv thing of Aeir bunness before that day ^
—No 2 but I have heard of defender's bu-
siness.

Were you of liieir society ?— No ; but when
they came to my fathei^s house, I went to
admiral Cosby'si and kept guard there, and
threatened to shoot any of them, that would

come: one GomeilytoM me, I m» to be
murdered for tliia espresiion.

Uyhmd made signs to you in the street ? —
He did.

Did you answer them ? — No.

Why did you not?— Because I did nof
know now.

Then is your evidence this, that you went
into the bouse in order to save your life? —
I was told that I mieht lose my fife, before I
went half a street if I did not

Then it was ^om the fear of being mur-
dered before ^rou should go half a street,-
that you went in to be a United Irishman f
— ^You have oAen heard of men being mur-
dered in the business.

Do you believe that?— I do \ it is common
through the country; I have read the pro-
clamations upon it, and you may have oone
so too.

How soon after you were sworn, did yea
see the magistrate ?— I was sworn upon the
95th, and upon the 98th I was brought to
lord Portarlineton, and in the interval of the
two days Hyland was with me and dined
with me.

Why did you not go the next day ?--^Be-
cause I did not get clear of them, and thej
mi^t murder me.

where did you sleep the first nisht after?
— At my own place; I was very luU, verj
drunk.

Did either of them sleep there? — ^Ne.

Where did 3rou liver — ^In Kevin -street,
among some firiends good to the same cause.

Where did you see Hyland the next day?
— He came to me next mornMUg before I was
out of bed, Mod stayed all day and dined : we
drank full in the evening.

What became of yiMi the next day?— i
Hyland came early again, and stayed all day ;
I was after getting two cuineas from my
brother. I was determined to see it out. Id
know their conspiracies, after I was sworn.

Then^^you meant to give evidence ?— ^I nevef
went to a meeting, that I did not give a» ac-
count of it.

Coarf.- To whom did you give infonn-
ation?— ^To colonel Henntker, lord Por-
tarlington and Mr. Secretary Cooke in the
Castle.

How soon after these meetings?— I gave
information before I went to Newmarket on
the Coomb, that I was to meet there.

I wish you would recollect yourself as lo
Mrs. Moore, did you not swear, that thertf
was no reihearing of a cause between you, be-
fore a magistrate? — ^You did not ask me thai
before.

I ask you now?— I believe there was be-'.
tween her and the bailiff.

You were not swom^^I never swo#e ia
oath there. I was talking to a young man of
the name of Kilbride

CouH. — What was the re-hearine about ^
—She bad let my brother and ttster TUn
in debt, and he passed a nolei and 4har

1060]

Jor High TreasotL

A. D. 1798.

[1070

was hurtine my credit iq Stradbally, and I
yma obliged to take up the note.

You were not sworn F-^ was noL

Did you get an order P — I got an immediate
summons without being sworn. She put an
tounediate summons upon the pillars of the
Tholsel, not knowing wnerel lived, and when
we came before the magistrate^ he tore them
'both.

Did you sa^ she was anested ? — ^Indeed it
was the bailiff humbi^ged me out of the
hioney ; I w«is not up to the tricks of Dublin
at that time.

Was she arrested ?— I beliere she was, the
bailiff told roe so.

Do you know Charles Clarke of Bhie-bell t
— -I have heard of such a man.

You do not know him ?^I do : I do not
mean to tell a he.

You did not know him at 6rstf —-There are
many men of the name of Clarke. I did not
know, but it might be some other : it did not
immediately come into my memory.

You thought it might be some other Clarke f
— ^There is a Clarke came in to me Yester-
day.

Did you ever ^et money from Clarke of
Bluebell, as an excise oiffieerf — I got three and
tliree*pence from him not to tell Fitzpatrick :
he did not know me, and I bought spirits
there; and seeing me walk witli an exciseman;
tie was afraid I would tell of him, and he gave
me tbc«e and three-pence.

And you put it into your pocket? — ^To be
sure.

Did Mrs. Clarke give you any money? —
Not that I recollect : I got three and thi«e*
pence between them ; the husband gave me
•three and three-jpence.

You said betore ho gave you three and
•three-pence ; that is settled ; did you get any
afterwards from her? — No, I jgotit from them
both. He struck her for giving tne spirits,
and then they disputed, and she gave him
money to give me, and I got it from it from
the husband.

Did ;fou pass yourself as a revenue officer
upon him ? — No.

You swear that ?— I do.

Ten know a man of the name of Edward
Puree] 1 ? — ^That is the man that led me into
T very thing, tie hafe £gured among the Uni-
ted Irishmen. He go* about 40/. of tlieir
tnomty and went off; he has been wrote to se-
v^al times.

How came you lo know bim?^Through
the friendship of ^tzpatrick; he had Fitspa-
trjck's wife, as a body might say^haviujg ano-
ther man's wife.

He ifaade you acquainted ? — ^i saw -him there
and Fitzpatnck well contented.

Did ^e ever give you a receipt?— ^He did.
' Was it fbrjnoney ? — ^No.

What was it?— It was partly an order,

where byland, he and I hoped to'be together :

It was a pass- word that I gave him to go to

Hyland to buy light gold that I knew was

going to the country.

Bid you ever give him any other receipt ?
— I do not know but I might ; we had many
dealings.

Had you many dealings in receipts ?— In re-
ceipts.

I m^n receipts to do a thine : as to make
a pudding, kt. Did you eive mm receipts of
that nature ?— I do not Icnow but t might
give him receipts to do a great number of
things.

To do a great number of throgsf— What
are they f-— Tell me the smallest hinti and I
will tell the truth.

Upon that enjgagenent, I will tdl you f did
you ever give him a reeeipt to turn silver into
gold, or copper into silver? — Yes, for turning
copper into silver.

You have kept your word ? — ^I sud, I would
tell every thing against mysdf.

Do you consider that agaunst yourself?— -I
tell you the truth; I gave fain a receipt
£k making copper money like silver mo-
nev. I

What did you |ive it him for? Did he
make use of it ? Was it to protect his copper
from being changed that you did il? — He
was very officious to make things in a lieht
«asy way without much trouble, to make his
bread light. But I did it more in fun thaa
profit.

You did not care bow much coin he made
by it ? — I did not care how much coin he made
by it: he might put it upon the market
cross.

Do you say, you do not care how many
copper shillings he made?* -I did not care
whether he made use of it or not.

Upon your solemn oath you say, that you
did not care how many base shillings he made
in consequence of the receipt you save him?
— ^I did not care how many he told of it, or
what he did with it.

Had you never seen it tried ?— No, I never
saw the recipe I gave him tried, but I saw
others tried.

For making copper look like nlver?— To
be sure.

Do you recollect, whether you gave him
half a crown upon which that recipe was
tried ? — I never saw it tried, but I gave him a
bad half crown ; I dkl not give it htm in pay-
ment. I did it more to humbug him, tlian
any thing else.

Were you never a seller of tea at Stradbal-
ly ?— Never.

Any where? — No.

At the canal?— No.

Had you ever in your custody any quan-
tity of tea? — ^Never but when I might 4itipf 4t
^ ray family, and4>ring it'home.

You^nevcr bought al quantity of lea at the
canal stores? — Never.

Did you demand any there f— No.

Nor send any person to demand any? —
No: I do not know what you, are talking of
at all.

Do you know of any tea that Fitzpatrick
sei^d ?— iJo,

1071] 38 GEORGE III.

Did you ever live at Power** in Thomas^
street ? — I did by day, but never at night.

Do you recollect tea being taken out of
Power's house? — No I do not recollect its
being taken ; but I recollect to have heard of
such a thing being done.

Were you ever charged with having that
tea? — ^I went home the evening the tea was
said to be taken, and was in bed, when at
twelve o'clock at night, Master John Power
and some watchmen came and took me out
of bed. They searched the place.

Mr. Solicitor General.-^ Bow long since?
-^Twelve or fifteen months ago.

Mr. Curran, — Is that your hand writing? —
— [showing a paper to the witness]. That is
ny hand- writing.

That is one of the receipts you gave Power?
— I do not know ; but I gave him many, I
won*t deny any thing.

Have you no recollection of any other that
you gav« him?— I may have given him
others.

You have no recollection of them ? — Unless
you brighten my memory.

You nave no recollection now o what any
other receipt was. Do you swear that ? — In*
deed I have not, but as you may give me a
small hint, it may come to me.

Recollect what you said. I ask you, have
you no recollection of what any of them was?
— I have not, barring you give me some small
hint, and then I will tell it.

Do you know what became of that tea? —
No.

Did you ever tell anv one you did? — No

Did you tell any bodfy that you found any
tea? — ^No.

Nor that you had lodged any at the canal ?
— ^No.

Do you know a man of the name of Patrick
Brady ?— No.

Or Michael Brady ? —Not that I recollect.

Then you never told such a man, that you
had taken the tea, or knew anything of it? —
Never to my recollection. It I did, it was
false.

Did you ever tell it, true or false, to any
person, that you got half of it as an informer ?
— ^Never.

Do you know Mr. Roberts ?— What Mr.
Roberts?

Mr. Arthur Roberts of Stradbally ?— I do.

Did you ever talk to any person about his
givmg a character of you ?— He could not give
a badcharacter of me.

Did you ever tell any person about his giv-
ing jou a character ?'-I sity now, in the
heanng of the Court and the jury, that I heard
of his beinj; summoned against me, and unless
he would forswear himsdf, he could not give
me a bad character.

Did you ever say you would do any thing
against him ? — ^I said I would settle him, but
do you know how ? There was a matter about
an auction, that I would tell of him.

Had you a weapon in your hand at the
time?— I believe I had a sword.

Trial of Patrick Knney

[107S

And a pistol ?— >Yes.

And you had them in your hand at the time
you made the declaration ?— -I knew he was a
government man, and I would not do any
thing to him in the way of assassination.

Do YOU know a man of the name of GeM'ge
Howell ? — Thomas Cuok knows him.

Do you know him ? — Yes.

Did you pass yourself before him as a reve*
niie officer ? — I do not remember that I did.
It might be the case through drink.
. You must be very drunk when you did it ?
—I never did it when sober.

Did you ever apply at justice Wilson's
office in New-street, tor a summons as a rere-
uue officer? — ^It is not in New-street at all.

Well, did you apply at his office? — ^It was at
his office I ^t the summons for Cavanagh,
and the justice desired me when the man was
to appear, to bring the officer of the walk
there.

But you did not pass yourself there as a
revenue officer?— If I did Mr. Wilson would
pot desire me to have the officer of the walk
there.

You said you never sold tea to any body ? —
Never.

Do you know a man of the name of Dunn ?
— I know the wife of Matthew Dunn who
keeps the Chum-inn in Thomas-street.

Mr. Solicitor General, — What you said
about Roberts, you said publicly ? — I made no
secret of it ; but I did not say it with a bad
intent.

Jury, — ^Was Finney present^ when the
conversation was held about cutting off
the hands, and putting out the eyes of per-
sons saspected of informing government ? —
He was ; and he said farther, which I forgot,
but say now, that there should be a day ap-
pointed to brin^ such persons in, as they might
not get out again. «

John Atkinson sworn.

Did you ever see the last witness that was
here ? — I did.

Did you ever go to a public-house in Meath-
street ? — Yes.

What house ?— The sign of St. Patrick.

Coif rf.-- What time ?— The latter end of
May.

What did you find there ?— I found the wit-
ness there and several others.-

Did you find a man of the name of Cook
there ? — ^I think so ; there were sixteen in all.

How did you obtain admission there ? — I
was told the signal word was ^ Is Mr, Patrick
here,** and upon mentioning that, I would be
admitted.

Court. — ^WIk) informed you of that word ?
— I got it from colonel Alexander. I gave
the word, and passed by two persons, seem-
ingly cenlinels on. the stair-oaise, who deshced
.me to go forward.

You then got into the room ? — ^I did.

Were the people sitting there? — ^They were
sitting at a long table, one at each end^ the
rest aToncr-side.

1089]

for High Treason

A. D. 179a.

[1090

TheDy geDtlemen, consider what is th« prin-
ciple 01 law on which their lordsiiips would
80 decide. It is this, that a man rendered
infamous h^ conviction can not iiave credit in
a court of justice. How doea this principle
apply in the present case, where tnere has
been no .conviction ? Mark the application, it
is the pivot on which your verdict must turn.
I do say. on the principleof law which I have
stated, that if you believe conscientiously that
O'ficien is. a felon, if you believe his o^n
confession that he has been a coiner, you
must conclude that he is incompetent t6 im-
press your minds in favour of bis credit; and
you must reject, his evidence as untrue, as the
evidence of an infamous character who has
forfeited all claim to veracity. I repeat it —
and I am happy to see ymi attend to me-^-I
repeat, had this informer been pursued to con*
viction, had he stood a recorded murderer,
coiner, thief or pilferer, his infamy would have
rendered him incompetent in law; it would,
as a witness, have as completely closed his
inouth as the hand of death. And I therefore
i^ure you to remember, that though he has
not been cuiivicted, tlie record of wnich con-
viction must have rendered him dead in law,
yet his own conftfssions of guilt, if they have
not totally destroyed his credit as a witness;
they must have created in your breasts «
dmtht — a doubi on which you will found your
verdict of Not Guilty ; for, gentlemen, I do
boldly assert, without fear of contradiction,
(hat doubt and acquittal are synonimous tenns
in the law of the land.
' I am neair a conclusion: The attorney*
general, has told you, and the Bench will tell
you, that where you doubt, you must acquit.
Suppose the prisoner at the bar to be an in-
famous character; would you give credence
to any witness of cc|ually infiimous character,
appearing against him ?— Certainly you would
not. But, we will show you that the prisoner
h a man of excellent character, aTMJ then
taking into consideration * the infifimy of
Q'Brien^will you not doubt, and doubting,
will you not acquit f Gentlemen, you will not
say, upon the evidence you have heard firom
O^Brien and Clarke, coadjutors in perjury,
that the prisoner at the bar is guilty of high
treason, nut you will concur wiUi the law and
say^.M yffc jffnifi and np^ acauH,^

, And here, gentlemen, I must differ with
tbe attorney-general — he lias told you that
Ihe atrocity of the offence should have no
effect on your minds; but I think it ought to
have great effect ; for I think, as it requires
the most indubitable proof to convince you
that the prisoner has committed the heinons
dflence cnareed upon him, tbe greatness of
the offence should weigh in favour of the pri*
son^r ; and therefore Isay , that where a man
of infamous character makes a charge of such
a nature, the atrocity of the charge, coupled
with the baseness of the witness, should insure
the prisoner his life— doubt it must create —
tfiough the prisoned gave no evklence to Ms
VOL, XXVI.

moral chalkcter; but how strong, how impe-
rative, on your consciences must that doubt
be, if the prisoner appears before you an
honest man, though a very poor man, of un-
impeached reputation? It tnat should be the
case, and t am instructed to say we shall give
such evidence, it must radically destroy all
O'Brien has said, and you will not leave the
box without a verdict of acauittah

I trust, gentlemen of tne itiry, you ' will
conceive that I .have been right in urging to
you that doubt and acquittal nave the same
meaning ; at least that the latter is the legal,
and indeed tho iust as well as the merciful
consequence of the former; and that, on that
ground, you will give life and liberty to the
prisoner. Gentlemen, we have some evi-
dence to produce — you will hear their testi-
mony—-I have prudential reasons for not
stating it-:- the duty of observing on the evi-
dence falls to abilities far supenor to mine —
I have only, to add that, leaving the life of my
client to your disposal, I leave him to your
fiat with confidence— God direct you— On my
own part, and on the part of the prisoner,
most gratefully I return you thanks, for that
patient attention you have, paid to my argu-
ments—your verdict will show their effect. ,

[After Mr. M'Nally had concluded, the
evening being far advanced, and a: pro-
bahility of the trial continuing some
hours longer, the Court adjourned, for
twenty minutes, and the sheriff was or«
dered to provide some refreshment for
the jury^but they were not allowed to
quit the box.]

When the Court was resumed,

Mr. Justice Chamberlain said. — ^We wish,
that the counsel for the prosecution would
point out the overt acts upon which they
mean to rely, and to which they apply the
evidence, before the counsel for the prisoner
shall speak to the evidence.

Mr. Cttrron.— My lords, we firH pray that
the paper which O'Brien admitted to be his
hand writing, and given by him to Purcell,
may be reaoT

The paper was then read as follows : —

RECIPE

** To plate Copper or ifc.

*' File up some silver very small-^add to as
<' much aquafortice as shall cover the silver,
** then simper them in ft tea cup for S m<*.
^ then add to a small quantitv Craroe a tartar,
'*then dip in your cork anas', plate — then
'* boil them in salt and water, till you see
^ them gro why te, then rub them with Cramc
*« a tartar."

'* A mixture qf Minerahthat ehaU equal SUver,

*'Take Hb. of long eraind tin-^Do. of
'< Rock solder, or why& opilteri lib. of Block
*' tin.

4 A

«<
4t

(C

}Q^]} 38 G5QJIGS JUL

<« N. B. to be melted iJl tpji^ethfer^ to be

poured into a pint of vioigcear. a drup of

Si\pp|iinent— {lb. of pine top asnes^tnis is

not to be melted more than i time ia the

al>ove mixture of waters.

" N. B. tbe Liq^ must pe waram.**

" For melting minerals you must have

white- rock-asnick to extract sUver from

copper you roust have sadcramoQick.

*" Rig*. Hono*». the Countess

Merculer-watter

Venegar & pine top ashes.''

MtLTgnrei Moore sworn.

Where do you live ?— At Stradbally in the
Queen's county, about forty-miles from this.

Pray, Mrs. Moore, do you kno# James
O'Brien ? — I did know a James O'Brien, who
lived in Stradbally, and was reared and born
there.

Do you know his general character ?— I do
since he was bom.

In what line of life are you ? — I am livins
in an industrious situation, in a shop in Straf
bally.

Are you a married woman? — I am a mar-
ried woman.

Do you know jlhe general character of that
James O'Brien ^— I knew his general charac-
ter until he cf&me to bublin, and have heard a
great deal of it since.

From your knowledge of his general
character, do you believe he is deserving
of credit upon his oath ?— During the time I
knew him in his father's life time until be
eame to manhood, I would not give a groat
for his oath, and that is enough at present

Do you say for his general character, that
he is not deserving of credit ?-r-I do,.if Twere
to die for it this moment

Do you recollect whether you were arrested
al any time by any body } — I do. He come
to me in tbe morning, and asked me was I
ready to come to Dublin : 1 told him 1 was
not, because I did not choose to go in his
company. He then said, his wife and he
were confine off; they went on Monday and
1 came on Tuesday— the least money we' have
tbe most we must make of it->I was at
Mountjoy-square^ and k» I was coning over
the bridjge, a man came up near to me. I
asked him, what was the matter : he asked
me was my name Moore. 1 said it was ; he
said he had a tmall demand against me. I
asked biiu at what suit J tell the s»iy as
well as I can; he said James O'Brien. James
O'Brien, says I, I know the roan right
enough ; the dirty black-guard, what demand
has he against me? They brought me to the
tholsel or spunmng house, and James O'Brien
came to the door. I said, " you scoundrel
what demand have you against me? — ^if you>
come to a friend's house I will give you satis-
factwn that I do not owe you any thing.'' I
culle^ to the lady of the house, and asked her
to keep t^o siiineas for me, till I would call
next mominj. I tame to the tholsel jneat

Triply f^nck Fimtjf

mpn^ipg. O'Brien i^as there— f< Are you
th^rie, my genilemao,'' ^ys I—" You see X
am,** says be—" Very well,"|»ys I ; " I must
know how I owe you this money .^ I took
out a siunmons for him. Then the utting

the lie, and be tore the order, and thai was
all; and I hope I have said enough. Tbe
bailififtold roe at another time, that f mndered
him of getting at the money.

That money was ordered back to you?— -
It was.

Cotcfi.— What house was this money de-'
posited in?— The house where I was lodged^
the spupging-house.

Cross<«xaiained.

How often have you been in Dublin before
this ?— I cannot tell.

You have been veryoAen? — ^I have been
two or three tiroes a year.

You have been acquainted with the nttii^
justices ? — For a part

You have been acquainted with them be-
fore this time ?— I never was before him,
before that time.

What is your husband's name ? — Kelly.

Where does he live? — ^NearMouotmeliick^
in a gentleman's service.

How long is it since you and he have been
apart from each other? — I see him as oAea
as I can : he lived with Mr. Cassan of Shef-
fields *Qd it traa Mr. Fletcher brought him
there.

Did not O'Brien think you were married?
— ^Hedid not see me married, but I believe
he thought I was married.

Uow long are you married ?— Thir^-threo
yf»rs.

And knowing that you were a married
woman, O'Brien had you arrested. Did you
tell the sitting justice you were married r—
No.

Did you ever take a journey to Kilkeoiiy f
—Me!

By virtue of your o^h ?-^I did live at Kil-
kenny.

How long ago? — ^Twelve years ago.

You went to live there ?— I did.

From SlradbaUy?— Yes, sir.

For what reason? — I had a son bouod
prentice tp a shoe- maker, oneSpeare, and I
nad some friends qf the name ot Fitspatrick,
uA I went there.

Was Uiere np ciiaixe aninsl yoq in Strad*
bal^ ?— No^ I never heard of any.

Did you evef Jive with a man of tbe jianw
lofAicbboki?— Mel

In the wfty of service I mean ? — ^Na

Do you know a man qf U^at name or Asl^
l^ld?— >My hustNin4 Uv^ with a gen^emui
of th|i|tname.

Was there a charge Against you lYspecti^is
puitains?— Against me ! I have never limia
of any thinj of tfaa kind.

-10931

fw HigirfrtHivn.

Is there a woman of the name of WaUcer in
ilradbally f— There is, Molly Walker.

Was there any tbmg said about Istitter,
bacon, or such articles being stolen P — I never
stole any.

Was there ever a charge made about it P
Your husband knew this man O'Brien, as well
as you did ?— No, he does not.

You live in the town of Stradbally >•— I do,
and honestly.

What rent do you pay?— Eight guineas a
year.

What have you for that .*— I have a house,
with a shop.

What commodities do vou de^ fb^?— In
crockery ware and delfl, when I carT touch it,
tea, sugar, eggs and bread; and every thing I
can put my hand to, and make a p^nny by.

You put a hand to any thing yon meet f^l
do in that line, not in any other.

{Here the jury desired she might point cmt
O'Brien, which she did— saying, << That
is the very identical lad/']

IMd yoio et^er heat- of this man b^ing exa-
mined as a witness before?— No, I kneW
nothing about him but «rbat I told you.

IIow long since you were arrested ?--^Last
May twelvemonth.

Did you travel with him ? — ^No.

You were very intimate with hink^-.-Na
not anv more than any other : I keptliira off,
as well as I could.

Did you ever eat or drink together? — I
never drank a drop of tea with his wife in my
life.

How came this man to propose to you to
come to town, if you were not intimate?
How came it to be planned and settled, and
agreed upon between you ?

Mr. CttrTaii.*-She said no such thing.

Did you not sa^, he thought you would be
to town with him .>— Well, suppose so ; I
will not say any more.

Did you not say, he thought you would be
io town with him ? — I will not answer any
mone.

You must ? — He called in the mornicg, and
I said \ was not ready, and he went off by
himself.

Did you not say, he thousht you would be
"with him ? — I do not know whether he thought
so, or not.

Did you say so ? — I do not know ; he said
one Nalty and himself Were going to town,
and I said, I eouhl not go.

I ask you again, were you not upoik such
4ermS| thaithis proposed to travel with you f
— I would come with others, I thought less
about. . .
^ How long have you lived in Stradbafly f
Since I was born ; I have been tliirty- three
years keeping hotise.

Do you know any perten of th^ Queen's
county here?— I do: Mr. Gray, Mr. Greave^
atni Mr. Dunn.

They are witnessesr along with you ?'*Nd ;
tiey were hcire before.

A. D. 1798.

Ma e^fte

[1094

Where do you )ive ?— At the Blue Bells. •

Do you mean in the county of Dublin ? —
Yes.

How long have you lived there ?— Since I
was born. .

WhsLt l^usTfie^ ?-*A bleacher.

Any other ? — The public business.

Do you know James O'Brien? — ^Yes.

Would you know him now, if you saw him?
—There is the man.

What business doas he ftiHow ?-^l do not
know.

Did he ever tell you what bidinest he fol-
lowed ? — ^No, but he came to me as a revenue-
officer.

How db you know that P— By t^ulUng out a
pNDcket book and some paper, and 1: being
»mple, thought him an officer.

To what place did he come.^-»-To my
house.

Did he tell you what the paper was P — H<i
detaia^nded my ncence firom mc, and I did not
know but he mi'ght be an ofhcer.

CoBff.^-^What papers did" he aull oUtP-—
He pulled out a paper as for a licence ; he
s^id h^ would nm me to 17/. . expense, i,
gave him two and two pence, and twelve
pence in halfpence.

At that time, did he say for what he would
run you to the expense? — For seflix^ spirits
without licence ; I did not know but he was
the right person*

What Qo you mean by supposing him tha
right persoti ?— I did not know but he was a
real officer.

What happened there ?-«-He came three or
four days after, demanding more money.

Co«rr.—r What did you give him th^
three shillings for?-— On his demanding a
licence. Afterwards he came and said, if I
gave him half a guinea, he would nut trouble
me again, nor suffer any body else.

So you gave him two sums ? — I did.

Was he sober when he came to you In this
manner ? — He was, and pleaded poverty, and
he wanted shoes, and desired me to assist
him.

Had he been acquainted with you before f
-<•- I never saw him before he camie to me in
this character of an officer.

If O^Brien said, he never passed as a re-
T^nue officer, would he swear true ? — ^Nb : hd
passed as a revenue officer to me.

And he was sober f — ^He was.

Did you give that money as civility money
to an officer? — I gave it in fear, to tell the
traih, fbr h<^ ^id be would take the bed fironi
under ma

IToli keep a public house at the Blue £(ell \
-*Ye8.

How long.?— Two vears.

Hav6 you not sold liquor more than two
years P— I have kept *lne opposite house,
twelve years ago.

1095 j 38 G£ORG£ III.

How long have vou sold liquor ?— >I sold
liquor in Ames's-street; I have sold mall
and huxtery. * '

Do you mean malt liquor ?— 'Yes.

Did you sell any liltle spirits in that' time f
— I am a working man, and keep' a bottle
for myself.

Mr. Cttrran.— He ts not boimd to answer
these questions.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain. — ^He ianot bound
to answer them, but may if be choose.

Pray did O^Bnen ever drink at yoar house ?
—Not to my knowledge, barring a draft of
malt.

' Have you always had a licence for sdling
liquor?

Mr. Curranj^\l^ is not bound to answer.

O'Brien called at your house and showed
you a paper, and told you he would charge
you wifh selling liquor r— He did.

He said he would prosecute you ? — ^He aaid
fae would bring the army there, and take the
bed from me.

Did he not threaten you to prosecute you if
you did hot eive him money ?— He said be
^ould bring ue army there, and I gave him
two and two-pence in silver, and twelve- pence
in brass.

And you have been a publican in Jarocs'a-
street and at the Blue Bell, and you were
threatened by a man, sftyine he would bring
toe army upon you. Dia you see a sum-
mons?— I do not know ; I cannot read.
' Did he not threaten to prosecute you?—*
Hfe did sure enough.

When did you first tell this story to any
bod^ ?— Immediately after itliappened.
.. To whom ?— To my neighbours.

Mention tbem?— To John Hanlon of the
91each-Green.

Did you see O'Brien since that ?— I did, in
Jatties's-street.

Is there not a justice of peace near you ? —
There is.

Did you complain to him ?— No.

And when did you tell Hanlon of the
Bleach-Green ?— I told it often.

You were afraid O'Brien would prosecute
you ; you know Cavanagh of the Red Cow ?—
1 do; he is here.

You have often talked with Cavanagh about
this niat'ter?— We have.

How often within these four months?— I
met Cavanagh upon his own ground, and he
talked to me often.

How came you here to day ?— I came here
to tell the truth.

Did you come here of yourself ?— I did.

You heard Finney was to be on his trial?
—I did.

And what of O'Brien f — I heard he was
under a bad character.

And what made you come hexe f from a
point of conscience and justice ?*^es, with-
out fee, or reward.

And how came you to come here without
fee or reward ?— To tell the truth. •

Trial of Pair Uk Finney

[1096

What invited you ?— Nothine more.

You heard by account, that Hnney was to
be Uied >-.! did.

And out of justice you came, hearing of
this trial? and that is the truth ?— Yes,

And the whole truth ? — Yes.

How long do you know Finney ? — ^I do not
know him.

Court, — Were you summoned ? — I was.

When were you summoned ?— This day.

Was that the first day f— No, I was sum-
moned yesterday.

When before ?— Yesterday week.

When before that?*-I cannot recollect.

And to whom did ypu mention this matter
before ?-«I do not know.

You came of your own accord, for a man
you do not know ? Ci^i you tell how you canie
to be summoned ?-*'I cannot.

And have no guess about it ? — ^No.

Have you a great resort of company to yoor
boase P—No^ very few.

An odd meeting of a Saturday night ?«^No :
but a few of my own workmen.

Jtir^.*-Did O'Brien say be was a revenue
officer?— He did.

William Dunn twom.

Where do you liveT^ — At No. 57, Dame*
street.

What is your way of lite ?— Shop-keeper to
Mf. Butler, at present.

Do you know James O^Brien ?— I know
James O'Brien of the old mill near Strad-
bally.

' Look about and try if you see him ?«*Tbis
is the man.

Have you known him long ?— Since he was
a child.

Have you known his person and character?
— Sipce his father's death.

.From your knowledge of his general cha-
racter, do you think he aeserves to be believed
upon his oath in a court of justice? — Why
indeed and upon my oatH, 1 would not take
his oath, nor believe his bath for any' small
matter.

Do you know Mrs. Moore, who was on the
table a while ago ?— I do.

Court, — What do you mean by saying,
you would not take his oath for a smadl
matter ?— That I would not take it for three-
pence, or any thing at all; I would not
believe him.

Cross-examined.

Did you ever hear of tliis man being exa«>
mined m a court of justice . before ?— No : it
is from other matters I form my^opimon.

Patrick Cavanagh sworn.

What business do you follow ?-r-A farmer.

What else?— I keep a carrier's inn.

Where do you liver --At Inchecore.

Do you know the Red Cow ? — ^Yes^ I keep
that house. ^

Do you know James O^rienf— I have
seen him several times.

1097]

Jqt High Treason*

A. a 17^.

[101*

Would jou know himf-rl believe I would.

Do you see him there? — I do not know;
fHere O'Brien was pointed out to the witness]
I think, that is tlie man.

Do you remember his ever coming to your
house ?— I do.

What passed P-^-He came to my house and
-said he was stationed in the walk ^ I thought
Fitzpatrick was the man ; no, said lie ; why
then, said I, he was here yesterday; then said
he, Fitzpatrick is to show me the way till I
am acquainted with it.

Did he ask any thing from you? — No.

Was he very druqk.? — ^No: he was very
sober, I think.

Did he come to you agpun ? — He did.

What passed that time?— He came to the
cdlar, and there was a hogshead of beer and
one of porter, and he turned the cock and
eiamined. He asked me to lend him four-
pencOy whkh I did, and gave bim bis break*
fast. He then aumrooned me ; and a man
came to me and said, he was sony for me;
why? sakll; because said b^ you have a
large family, and God help you when begets
the book into his hands.

Did any thing £irther pass 2— Yea:. I went
to the justice ; a roan desired me to make it
Aip; I said I wouk), rather than be in such
hands. I was told he said t assaulted him.
J saidj if giving bim his breakfast was an
jMsault, I assaulted him.

Dul you make it up ?—I did^ when I saw
him the neit day.

What money did you give him before that
time?— All I had.

How much was that?.— Two guineas, and
some change .

For an assault never committed? Did you
ever assault him ? — Never, by my o^th.

Is 0*Bricn a inan, that ought to have credit
upon his oath in a court of justice ?— I do not
Jcnow him, but what I have told you.

George Howell sworn.

What is your situatk>n in life ?— Clerk in a
public-office.

What office ?— -Justice Wilson's office. .

Do you know James O'Brien ?•:— I do.

Did he ever go to your office?— He did.

Upon what occasion ? — He came there one
rooming; Mr. Wilson was not there: he
wanted summonses for persons who sold li-
quor without licences. I asked in what walk ?
he mentioned the Cow and Calf, and Fox and
Geese; I asked biro, what was become of
Fitzpatrick, whom I knew? be said he vras
turned iDut, and that he supplied his place': I
«aid there were not summonses enough;,
aometifflCB we have one or two, sometimes
.twenty. He took out a large pocket-book,
and said he ,had plenty fropi, the commis-
sioners of the revenue jmd Mr. Swan^ I did
;aot see the fellow for spme days after. I
met Fitzpatrick in some days after, and ex-
4>res8ed ny sorrow, that be.was tunnid out
mnSkoAvnh wh6 told itt I ^ O'Brien.

The greatest rascal and informer upon the face
of the earth, said he. We met him near -
Bishop-street, and I asked him about it, an4
he ran up Bisiiop-street, and I never saw the
fellow since that time to this.

Was he sober? — Perfectly; it was ten
o'clock in the day.

William Byrne sworn.

Did you see a man of the name of Clarke
in court to-day ?— I did.

When did you see him before? — ^Yesterday.

How was he dressed ? — In a short jacket,
in scarlet.

Where did you see him yesterday ? — In coorl
standing there.

Did you hear him swear he was not in
court yesterday ? — I did, whkh is the cause
of m^ coming forward in this manner.

Did he swear true ?^ He did not

Bernard Cummint sworn.

Do you know the prisoner at the bar ?^
Ido.

How long?^-Many years.

What business do you follow?— The to*
bacco business.

What is his general character ? — I nevef
heard any thing improper of him.

Did you ever hear, until the present charge,
of his loyalty being impeached ?— Never.

Court, — Did he work with you ? — He did.

How long ?-*Many months*

Cross-examined.

Was there ever any charge made against

you? — ^No. 1 ;

Were you ever taken up on any charge? —

No.

[Case rested for the prisoner.]

Peter Clarke called up again on thfe part of

the crown.

When you were upon the table before, you
said, you were not in court yesterday ?-^I
made a mistake, being so puzzled.

Were you here yesterday ?— I was.

Did Mr. Kemmis send to you ? — He did.

Was it to come or slay from court ?— To
come to court.

Did you come ?— I did.

Cross-examined.

I

Did you not say, that Mr. Kemmis desired

ou not to come ? — I did, being puzzled, and

did not know any thing of law.

Then not being a groat lawyer, you came

here and said you did not ? — ^I did.

Were you ever upon the table before? — ^I

was.

Then you are not so simple in the business ?
— ^I never swore wrong before.

You swore agamst one I^nch ? — ^I did#

Was he found guilty ?-»No.

Mr. Attomtjf General — ^The Court have
been pleased to ask, tb what overt acia^ we

109d] 88 6E0RGE lit.

ftLppI V this evl<)ence. I say, my lordd, we ap-
^y It to all the bvert acts— first, that he be-
ttme a member of the Society of United Irish-
hien ; there is evidence of that : that he con-
federated with them to assist the French ;
that he with others consulted and agreed to
send persons into France to invite the French
to invade this kingdom.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain, — I do not think
{he evid^Ace supports that. But in short you
think there is evidence t6 go to all the overt
acto?

Mr. Attctneff Genefal-^lUiy lord, I do.

Mr. CoftBiv.*— Mjr Lord^ and Gentlemen
of the Jury ;— In the early part of this trial, I
thought I should have had td addriess you on
the most important occiksion possible, on thi^
aide of the grave, a itiah labdut-ing for life, oil
the casual strieni^h of kn ekbausted, and at
best, a feeble advocate. But» gentlemen, do
not imafinethati rise under any such impres-
riona; do tiot imagine that I Appfbach vbu.
sinking under the hopeless difficulties or mv
cause. I am not ntfw soliciting your indul-
gence to the in^equacjr 6f toy powers, or
artfully enlisting your passions at tb^ side of
ftv clietat NoT grtiibntf .1, but t rite with
what of laW, 6f conscience, ff j^&tice, and
i^f constitution^ there exists within this realm
at my back, ind, standint hi front of that

Snmt and ijowernil alliatifce, I demand a ver-
ict of acquittal fbr my client ! What is the
opposition of evidence ? It is a tissue which
requires no strength to break through ; it va-
Ikishes it th6 touch, and is siinde^ed mto
tatters.

tile right b6B0^ihft>le getillenla!At»h6 staged
the case in the first stage of this trial, has
been so kind as to eifHress a raliaooe, that the
counsel for the prisoner would addi-ess the
Joiir with the subb amdour wUeli hi ei^stt^
piined on the part of the ciown ; readily and
confidently do I accept the compliment, the
Inore particutCirfy, as in my case I feel no
iempiation to reject it. Lite dBui present no
situation wherein the humble powers of man
«re so awfblly and so divinely exerted, as in
deffcnde bf a felfotr-dHtoture placed in the 6ir-
^umstfltnces (it niy elietft : and if Any laboXirs
can peculiarly attract the gracious ahd aiW

5 roving eye of heairen, it is when God looks
own on a hunkaa being assldled by human

* I have availed myself of the report of
Aiitf speech which is given in the fifth edition
of ''Currants Speeches/' The preface td
irtlteh publteation, sUtes that ** His defences
of Finney and Bond #eiiB considered by the
Wr at hi^ abicM perfbnMances M the State
trials of the year 1798. But unfortunately,
Af* iMperfiBei i^tiorts, Whi6h from Hctident or
design were gif «tt tb the public:, life rather
memorandmbs of fkfts, than spedmetts of the
talenu of the adV^bcate. If better could bkve
bflra ^niciiM', the pMh sBMA! havcf had

TriiU of Patrick Finney

[1100

turpitude, and strog^lingwitli practicesagainst
which the Deity has placed his special canon,
when he said, ''Thou shalt not bcw./h^
toitneu against thy neighbour f *^ Thou shalt
do no nmrderP*

Gentlemen, let me de»re you again and
again to consider all the circumstances of this
man's case, abstracted ftum the influence of
prejudice and habit, and if aught of passion
assumes dominion over you, let it be of that
honest, generous nature, that good men must
feel when they see an innocent man depend-
ing on their verdict for his life ; to thb pas-
sion I feel myself insensibly yielding : but tin-
clouded, though not unwarmed,! shall, I trast,
proceed in my great duty^ — Wishing to state
my client'^ case with all possible succinct-
ness which the natiite of the charge admits,
I am ehid my learnt colleague has acquitted
himsaf ori this head already to such an ex-
tent, and #ith such itbility, that any thing I
iteflsay iHn chance to be superfitious ; in troth,
that bonestv bf heait, and integrity of prin-
ciple, fo^ whidt all most give him credit,
uniting with a sound judgment and sympa-
thetic heart, have given to his stilteroent all
the advimtages it could have derived from
these (J^Klitlcls. He has truly said, that ** the
Declaratoiy Act, the twenty-fifth of Edward
Srd, in that on Which all charges of high trea-
son ar6 fenndcd," tfnd I trust the observation
will lie deeply engraven on yonr hearts. It b
An act itaade to sAve the subject firoto the
vague and wanderins uncertainty of the law.
It % aa act #hich leaVis it no loiiger doubtful
whether a man shall incur conviction by his
o#n eonduftt, 6r the sa^kdty of crown coo-
struction: whether he shall sink beneath his
own guilt, or the cniel and barbarous refine-
ment of cro^ii j^tosebUtion ; it has been moat
Utitly called the Mei^sed act; and oh! may
the great 6od of Justice and df mercy give ro-

gose and-^terMit blesslnj; to the soan of those
onest men by whoni it was epacted ! Bv
this law no man shall be convicted of high
trtf^son, but oil proveable ^idecce; the
overt acts of treasons, as explained in thii
law, shall be stated cltstW and di^nctly in
the charge; Atid the proof of these' acts shall
be equalw clear lind distinct, iff ofdar that no
tiMfti*s life inay depend on partiM and wicked
aDegalion.

It does ev^ry thing #hieh iMttfiitt foresight
could do to bring iht guilty inaii tb judgiAent,
and to save the inntfeent; it dbes every thing
but uttering the V«MicL whfehalon^remaiiS
wUh ybii, and whlfc'h, I trust, Voo ifUli give
In th« same j^Wter, honteftt^ saving; sph^^ in
whitsh that net Wtts foM^. GenHMieii, I
WMiM dlH it ^h ddlttipdttlift I2t, If It cMd
possibly appi! the iilfoMer fVelfaar 6tar eeu^ts of
jUSt^ee; bMla(#CMhtti<ttdblt; r^i|g;idn taNndt
4^ii;iths flSenfKg^'«f4lMMfl hfttiire, Mien iti
the 9iptv9^ hMPt of ^« WHfttchtdd &Hft>rtMr

>M«ailotbetlH««d!

iAf^ ^hitlf iMvftM tlMf liUMiMMbM ttV6#

Him beU( p<mitM at tllK^lhlMM^i^lai;

UOIJ

J^ High J^eaiQ9f

A. D. 1798.

[1102

^ut il has given him « shieU ia l))e integrity
of a jury ! Everv thing is 50 claar in ibis act.
that all must understand : th« several act^ of
treason must be recited, and provcable cod-
TtctioD must follow. What is proveable con-
viction? Are you at a loss to know? Do
you think if a man comes on the table, and
&ays--«* By viriue of my oath, I know of a
conspiracy against the slate, and such and
such persons are engaged in iV* Do you
think his mere allegation shall justify you in
a verdict of conviction? A witness coming
on this table, of whatsoever description, whe-
ther the noble lord who has been examined,
or the honourtible judges on the bench, or
Mr. James O'Brien, who shall declare upon
oath that a u\an bought powder, ball, and
arms, intending to kill another ; this is not
proveable conviction, the unlawful intention
shall be attached by cogency of evidence, and
the credit of the witness must stand strong
and unimpeached.

The law means not,'that infamous assertion
or dirty ribaldry is to overthrow the character
of a man ; even in these imputations flung
asuainst the victim ; there is fortunately some-
thmg detergent, that cleanses the character it
was destined to befoul.

In stating the law, gentleman, I have told
you that the pvert fLcXs must bp laid
and proved by positive testimony of untainted
witnesses, and m so 'saying I have only spo-
ken the language of the most illustrioiis wri-
ters on the law of England. I should, per-
liaps, apologize to you for detaining your
attention so long on th<^se particular pomts,
but tliat in the present disturbed state of the
public mind, and in theabandonment of prin-
ciple which it but too freqiicntly produpesj I
think I cannot too strongly impress vou with
the purity of leoal distinction, so that your
soids shall not be harrowed with those lor-
turiBff regrets which the return of reason
woula bnng ^ns with it, were you op the
present occasion, for a momept to r«^iga it to
the subjection of your passions; for Ibwe,
though sometimes amiable in their impeltio-
sity, can never be dignified andjust, but under
the control of reason. The charge minst
the prisoner is twp-fold — compessin^ ana imar

fining the king'i death, and adheinng to the
ing's enemies. To b^ accurate on this head
is not less ^y intention than it is my in-
terest ; for if I fall into errors, they will not
escape Uie learned counsel who is to come
%fter roe, and whose detections will not fail
to be made in the correct spirit of crown pro-
secution, lienlifiipien, there are no fewer
than thirteen overt acts, as described, to sup-
port the indictment; tliese, however, it is not
necessary to recapitulate. The learned coun-
^ for the crown has been perfectly candid
nnd correct in saying, that if any of theni
support either secies of treason charged in
tlie indictment, it will be sufficient to attach
the guilt I do not complain that on the part
of the crown it was not found expedient to

point out which aotorwts went to support'
the indictment; neither will I complain,
eentlemen, if you fia your attention particu-*
larly on the cirqumstance* Mr. Ailorney*^^
neiul has been pleased to make an observation,
which drew a remark from my colleague,
with whom I fully agree, that the atrocity o(
a charge should make no impression on you;
it was the judgment of candour and hberalitv,
and should be yours— nor though you should
more than answer the high opinion I entertain
of you, and though your hearts betray not
the consoling conndence which your looka ii>-
spire, yet do not disdain to increase your
slDck of candour and liberality, from whatso*
ever source it flows; and though the abun-
dance of my client's innocence may render
hin> independent of its exertions, your conntiy
wants it all. You are not tt> sufier impres-
sions of loyalty, or an enthusiastic love for tb*
sacred person of the king to give your judgments
the sipallest bias. You are to decide from
the evidence which you have heard, and if the
atrocity of the charge were to have any infln*
ence with you, it should be that of renderin|^
you more uicredulous to the possibility of its
truth. I confess, I cannot ooneetve a ereater
criqae against civilised society, be the form of
government what it may, whether monarchic
cal, republican, or, I had almost said,daepotic,
than the attempt to destroy the life oSf the
person holding the executive authority**tli*
counsel for the crown cannot feel a greater
abhorrence against it than I do ; and liappy
am I, at this moment, that I can do justice ta
my principles, and the feelings of my hemt
without endangering the defeix:e of my client,,
and that {defence is, that your hearts would
not foel more reluctant to the perpetration oA
the crimes with which he is charged, than the
man who there stands at the bar of his country,
waiting until you shall dear him fiom the
foul and unmerited imnntation— until . your
verdict, sounding life ana honour to his senses^
shall rescue him from the dreadfol foaciution
of the informer^s eye.

The overt acts in \ht change against the pri-
soner are many, and all apparently of the*
same nature, but they, notwithstanding, ad-
mit of a very material dbtinction; this' want
of candour I attribute to the base impositkm
of the prosecutor on those who brought him
forward. You find at the bottom of thecham
a foundation stone attempted to be laid uy
O'Brien; the deliberatbna of a society of
United Irishmen ; and on this am laid all the
overt acts. I said the dbtinction was of mo-
ment, because it is etideavourBd to be held
forth to the public— to all Europe, that at a
time like tbis of peril and of oanger, there
are, in one province alone, one bpndred and
eleven thousand of your countrymen con>-'
bined for the purpose of destroying the king,
and the tranauillity of the country, which so
much depenos on him; an assertion which
vou should consider of again and aeain
before you give it any otl|er existevoe nap

IIOS] 38GEORG£in.

it tlerives from the attaintins breath of the
infonner, if nothing shouM iDuuce that consi-
deration but the name of Irishman, the ho-
nours of which you share; a name so foully,
andy as I shall demonstrate, so falsely as*
persed.

If you can say that one fact of O'Brien's
testimony deserves belief, all that can from
thence be inferred is, that a great combination
of mind and will exist on some public subject.
What says the written evidence on that sub-
ject? What are the obligations imposed by
the test oath of the socie^ of United Irishmen f
Is it unjust to get rid of religious differences
and distinction F Would to God it were pos-
sible ! Is it an offence a^inst the state to
promote a full, free, and adequate representa-
tion of all the people of Ireland in parliament ?
If it be, the text fs full of its own comment, it
9eeda no comment of mine. As to the last
clause, obliging, to secrecy. Now, gentlemen
•f the jury, in the hearing of the Court, I
submit to the opposite counsel this question,
I will make my adversary my arbiter — Taking
tbe testpoathaii thus written, is there an^ thing
<if treason in it? — However objectionable
k may be, it certainly is not treasonable : I
admit there may be a colourable combination
of words to conceal a real bad design, but to
V^hat evils would it not expose society, if, in
this case, to suppose were to decide ? An high
legal authority thus speaks on this subject :
**. strong indeed must the evidence be, which
goes to prove that any man can mean by words
any. thing more than what is conveyed in
their ordmary acceptation." If the te6l of
any narticular community were an open one;
ify like. the Loodon Corresponding; Societv^it
were to be openly puhlisncd, then, indeed
tbere might be a reason for not usins words
in their commoo application ; but subject to
HO public discussion, at least not intended to
be so, why shoukl tbe proceedings of those
men or tin obligation by which they are cod-
oected, be expressed in the phraseology of
studied concealment.

;lf men meet in secret, to talk over bow
best the French can invsde this country, to'
what, purpose is it that they take an engage-
ment (ufierent in meaning^ Common sense re*
jeetothe idea ! Gentlemen, having stated these
distinctions, I am led to the remaininz divi-
sions of the subject you are to consi&r. I
admit, that because a man merely takes this
bbli^tion of union, it cannot prevent his be-
oommg a traitor if he pleases ; but the ques-
tion for you to decide on would then be, whe-
tl|er every man who takes it must necessarily
be a traitor? Independent of that engage*-
ment, have any superadded facts been proved
against the prisoner? What is the evidence
of O'Brien f What has he stated f Here,
gentlemen, let me claim the benefits of that
^leat privilege, which distinguishes trial bv
jury m this country from all the world.
Twelve men, not emerging from the must and
cobwebs of a study, awtncted from bonaB

Trial qfPatrwi Finney

[1104

nature, or only acquainted with its extrava-
gancies ; but twelve men, conversant with life,
and practised in those feelings which mark
the common and necessary mtercourse be-
tween man and man. Such are you, gentle-
men ; how, then, does Mr. O'Brien's tale hang
together? Look to its commencement. He
walks along Thomas-street, in the open day
(a street not the least populous in this city),
and is accosted by a man, who, without any
preface, tells him, he*ll be murdered before he
goes Aff^the street, unless he becomes a united
Irishman ! Do you think this a probable story ?
Suppose any of you, gentlemen, be a United
Irishman or a freemason, or afriendly bro-
ther, and that you met me walking tiraocfulfy
along, just like Mr. O'Brien^ and meaning no
harnif would you say, ** Stop, Mr. Curran,
don't go farther, yoiiMl be murdered before
you go half the street, if you do not become a
United Irishman, a free nnison, or a friendly
brother." Did. you ever hear so coaxmg an
invitation to felony as this? Sweet "Mr.
James O'Brien I Come in and save your pre-
cious life, come in and take an oath, or you'll
be murdered before you go half the street ! —
Do, sweetest, dearest Mr. James O'Brien,
come in, and do not risk your valuable exist-
ence.'^ What a loss had he been to his king,
whom be loves so marvellously ! WeD, what
does poor Mr. O'Brien do ? Boor, dear man,
he stands peuified with the magnitude of his
danger; alibis members refuse their oflBcer
he can neither run from the daoeer, nor call
out for assistance ; his tongue aeavesto bis
mouth; and his feet inoorperate with the
pavine stones ; it is in vain that his expres^ve
eye sileiitly implores protection of the passcn-

Ser ; he yielcfo at length, as greater men have
one, and resignedly submits to his fate; he
ttwn enters the house, and being hi imo a
room, a pared of men makefaem at him; but
mark the metamorphosis: well maj it be
said that * Miracles wyi never cease,''^he
who ibared to resut id open ur, and in the
hce of tbe piublic, becomes a bravo when pent
up in a room, and environed by sixteea men,
and dne is obliged to bar tbe door> while ano*>
tber swears him, which, after some resistance,
ts accordingly dk>iie, and poor Mr.. O'Brien be-
comes a United Irishman, for no earthly pur-
pose whatever, but merely to save his sweet
life ! But this is not all— > the pin so bittrr to
the percipiency of his loyal palate, must be
washed down, and lest he should throw it off
his stomach, he is filled up to the neck with
beef and whiskey.

What further did th^rdo? Mr. O'Brien,
thus persecuted, abused and terrified, would
have gone and lodged his sorrows in the sym-
pathetic bosom ofthe major,* but to prevent
nim even this little solace, they made him
dnmk. The next evening thev used* him in
the like barbarous manner, so that he was not
oiily sworn against his will, butj poor man, he

I n — ii—M— I ■ Hill ^ammmmmmmmmm^^

' *Siwi.

1073]

Jbr High Treason.

A. D. 17Q8<

11074

Had .you any converaation with them?---
No, I got a prayer-book in ooe of their
pockets.

They did not tell you what they were
about?— No, they seemed rather surprised.

Cross-examined.

You did not sec the prisoner there ?— No, I
did not see him there at all.

Feter Clark sworn.

Do you recollect the 31st of May last? —
I do.

Do you know Patrick Finney ?— I do.

Look and try if you see him ?— There he is.

Point him out ? — Tliat is he [pointing to the
prisoner].

Do you recollect being in company with
him any where ?— -In Thomas- street,&t Tuite's
house.

Was there any conversation P— There 'was.

What was it?

Court. — Who else was in company ? — Cor-
poral Thompson of the Kildare mihtia, who
l¥a^ murdered near the Naul.

Mention thie conversation ? — When Thom](«
son and T went into Tuite's to get a pot of
drink, Finney was backward in the tap- room ;
when he saw us coming in, he called out
*• Kildare, how are you.*° I did not at first
recollect him, but afterwards I did, that I saw
htm at Balbrtegen, where the regiment lay.
He afked me, now were all the boys; I said,
very well. He asked us in to take some
cfarink, he brought us from the shop into the
taproom, where one Saub was drinking wiUi
him.

Did you drink any toasts ? — He asked me,
were we up to the new plan that was ou. I
told him we were not, but was very anxious to
see it. With that, he sent the servant maid
Up stairs, and she brought down papers ; he
gave one to Thompson and another to me.

Was this one of the papers [a paper shown
to the witness] ? — This was the paper he gave
me ; I have a mark upon it.

Was there any farther conversation?—-
There was ; on giving me that paper, we had
a couple of pots of porter between us ; and on
■second recollection, he deured me to give
him the paper book a^n, as he could not
^ve it to me without bemz sworn ; he brought
me back to a cellar, and! did not wish to go
without Thoni^son along with me. He asked
•mc, was he clear, or up to this affiiir. I told
him he was ; then he let him along with us,
and nobody else was by.
- What has become of Thompson ?— »He was
murdered since near the Naul.
. Jiiry.«— Did he swear you ? — He did.

Whodid?^FimMy.

Court, — Did he swear Thompson ?**Nq,my
Jord^ he did not.

Had vou any fiirther conversation ?— We
retumcd and had a few pots, and Ihompson
went for a guard of the Inverness.

Did anything pass respecting what hap*

VOL. XXVI.

pened a ^y or two before ? Was there any
conversation about a ereen coat f .

Mr. M^'Nally, — I object to that question,

TKt^neu.»He made a brag to me, that six-
teen were taken, and, two got awav ; that he
St off, having a green coat and a black stock,
e euard on the stairs took him ibr an officer.
' Where did he say it was ? —Somewhere iu
the Liberty.

Did he say any thing more relating to his
escape ? — No, sir.

Thompson went; what was the conse-
quence ? — He went for a guard, and brought
a guard of the Inverness, and an officer, to
whom he gave the two papers. The officer
took Finney and Saols, and I, as prisoners
also.

Onart — Where did he bring you to?*«4)ver
to the Prevot in the barrack*

Did Thompson make any examination?— •>
He did.

Before whom .^^Mr. Alexander in William-
street.. . • . ,

Did you ?— I did.

Were you present when Thompson swore
his examination f — I was.

And he is dead ?'— He is.

Cross-examined.

This wa» in the public tap*room ?— I un-
derstand it was.

Was Fmney searched in your presence after
he was taken tip ?'— Yes he was: I do not un-
derstand ftearehing. .

Was an^ hand put into his pockets lo set
what watf in his pockets f— Yes.

Was any thing found on him ?'^Hi8 clothes
were upon him.

Was there any thing in his pockets ?— No.

He swore you upon a book ? — He did.

And he put it into his pocket ?^He did.

And when he was searched nothing was
found upon him ?— He might have mislaid it

Were you in the Carlow militia at any time \
—No.

Were you in the Carlow Bufis N^-I was.

Then) you know what Buff means. How
came you to quit that rdgiment?— -Whatdo
you imagine if aU the deserters in Ireland and
nave got the kinz's pardon

You have got the king's pardon ?— I have.

When you were in the Buffs did you not
take an oath upon the Evangelist ?—Ilfo,
never.

Were vou never attested ?— No ; I was
taken and crimped.

And never attested ?— No, never until I
belon&ed to the Kildare militia.

Ana you it^rer took an oath of allegiance ?
—I never swore.

Did you kiss your thumb ?•— No, nor my
finger.

Did you cfver go through the ceremony of
swearing ?*-No.

Did you ever hear the articles of war read
St ihe head of the regiment N— I never heard
Ibem. '
\ 3 Z

1075] S8 GEORGE HI.

Did you not hear some person bel^ind you
say *'' never ^ before you said it yourself f— I
have not.

How long were you in the Carlow Buffs?—
Three weeks.

Did you ever take an oath to obey the orders
of your officers P— Never.

Did you receive any money as a soldier ?—
None, but nay pay.

No money when you were crimped P-^No,
but half a crown.

No bounty ? — No.

How long have you known Mr. O'Brien ?
— I never saw him till tlie day after Mr. Fin-
ney was taken.

You and he have been much together since?
-• -No, I have been with my regiment.

How long have you been together ? — I have
not been with him, barring seeing him now
and then here.

Did you not walk with him yesterday ?— «
No.

Were you not here yesterday ? — No.

Were yoH not upon Orroond-quay ? — I was.

Did vou not hear that Finney would be tried
yesterday ?— I understood from Mr. Kemmis
that he would not be tried.

At what hour ?— -At ten o'clock.

You swore you deserted from the Carlow
Bufis ; what was the causeof it?-<-The reaKon
I got no l)ountyyand my family, four children
and a wife, bemg in town.

So you deserted in Carlow and came to hide
in Dublin ; did you not expect to be taken up
as a deserter?—! came to Athy first.

That was after you were charged in Carlow
or Kildare with felony. Yf ere you ever charged
with stealing any thing ? — No.
. Or receiving stolen goods? — No.

Did you not leave that regiment in conse-
quence of a charge against you for receiving
stolen goods ? Was any charge made against
you ? — No.

Were you ever charged with receiving stolen
goods ? — No.

Wasyou^ sole motive for deserting to be
with your wif<i and children?— The reason I
can tell easy ; I eot no bounty and was not
Bworn, and then I took on in the Kildare mi-
litia, and I defy any body now.

You came up in coloured ck)thes ? — I did.

You loft the regimentals behind you? — I
did, and got coloured clothes.

Court— Did you ever read that constitu-
Hoa T-r-l read part of it.

Do you know whether the oath you took
is in that paper ? — It is, please you, ray lordi

And you swear thisjs the paper? — It is.

The following extract from the paper was
read :—

TEST.

^ In the awfUl pnesence of God,

" I, A B, do voluntarily declare, that I will

^ persevere in endeavouring to form a bro-

'* therhobd of affection among Irishmeh of

** every religious persuasion, and that I wUl

Trial of Patrick Finney

[107a

'' persevere in my endeavours to obtain an
** eaual, full, and adequate representation of
'^ all the people of Ireland. I do further de-
^ dare, that neither hopes, fears, rewards, or
'' punisliments, shall ever induce me directly,
'' or indirectly to inform on, or give evidence
'* against any member, or members of this or
^ similar societies for any act or expression of
^ theirs, done or made collectively or indivi.
** dually, in or out of this society, in pursuance
<' of the spirit of this obligation."

TEST

For Secretanes of Soeiciie$ or Committees,

** In the awful presence of God,
"I, A, B, do voluntarily declare, that as
** lone as I shall hold the office of Secretary
" to Uiis I will to the utmost of

« my abilities, faithfully discharge the duties
" thereof.

** That all papers or documents received by
'* me, as Secretary, I will in safety keep; X
** will not give any of them ; or any copy, or
". copies ot them to any person or persons,
'' members or others but by a vote of thi^
'' ; and that I will at the ex-

'* piration of my Secretaryship, deliver up to
^ this all such papers, as may

** be then In my possession.'^

Mr. Toamsfnd.— With your lordships' per-
mission, we shall now examine lord Portar-
lington, and it is fair to apprize the Court an4
the counsel for the prisoner, of the object of
this evidence. The witness, O'Brien, gave an
account of his informing lord Portarlington of
what' was going on. There is an attempt
made to impeach the credit of the witness;
and to show his consistency, we now produce
lord Portarlington.

Mr. Curran. — If a witness be impeached^
it is competent to set him up, and to show
that the impeachment is not well founded.
Every witness is impeached by a cross-exami^
nation ; but it is not usual to hear evidence
in support of the witness for the prosecution
until the prisoner's case is gone through.
You may examine to character, or to particu-
lar facts, and the witness may be entitled to
call witnesses to his general character. But
can the counsel for the prosecution say,
'* This man's evidence is impeached, or seems
to be impeached by the counsel for the pri-
soner; therefore we think it necessary to
support him now." I submit, it is not compe-
tent for them to set up his character now.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain. — ^Tbe tendency of
the cross-exam'mation is, to impeach O'Brien
in this J>articular transaction, and the witness
now ofiered to be produced* is to show, that
he gave an account of the pfoceedines as they
happened. It is not competent for them now,
to produce witnesses to show, that the wit-
ness already examined is of good character^
but they want to prove that his fDraner ao-
count: ii consistent with his presents Such

1077]

fiir H^^h Treason^

A, D. 1797.

[1078

evidenct hai always baen rtcehfcJ in my ei-
peiience.

The Right Hon. John Earl of ForUrlingUn

sworn.

Your lordship saw James O'Brien, the wit-
ness, who was examined this day ? — I have
seen him.

Does yom* lordship recollect upon what oc-
casion you first saw him ?— I never saw him
till the latter end of last April, when an ac-
quaintance of mine, Mr. Higgins, brought the
witness to my house. Mr. Higgins said, the
witness had told him, he had matters to com-
municate to Mr. Pel bam, but as he had not
the honour of knowing him, begged of me to
introduce him. I desired to know the matter
and the character of the man. 0*Brien told
me, he had been lately admitted a member of
the society^ of United Irishmen ; that he there
found out, there was on the Sunday following
a great number of people to be collected
under pretence of a funeral; that the man to
be buned was already buried, and he appre-
bendedy or heard, that it would lead to insur-
rection. He also mentioned some other cir-
cumstances, I do not remember all. He
stated, that an attack was meditated upon the
arsenal of the Castle *. I told the matter to
Mr. Secretary Cooke, and therefore did not
lay it upon m^ memory.

How many interviews had you with him ?
— ^I think I had two interviews : I desired
him to come no more, as I had communicated
the matter to Mr. Cooke, to whom it belonged
more than to me. I asked him, had he any
thing new to communicate. He said, the
United Irishmen were busy corrupting the
servants of eentlemen.

Did all tnis conversation pass at one time?
— I think it all passed at one time. All I
mentioned first did.

Where? — At my house in Kildare-slreet.

When O'Brien related this matter, what did
you do with him ?— I went to the House of
Commons.and expected to see Mr. Pelham ;
he had some business, and Mr. Cooke came to
the Speaker's chamber, where O'Brien related
all that he did to me.

O'Brien afterwards called a second iime ?—
He did.

Your lordship mentioned something that
passed at the second meeting ; can you state
any thing more that passed at the second
meeting? — ^No, I cannot. As well as I re-
collect, what he said, was at the first meet-
ine; what he said at the second was trifling.
I desired him not to come to me, but to apply
to the executive government.

Had your lordship any farther meeting after
the second? — ^I do not recollect: he mi^ht
have come a third time ; but I did ndt like
his coming after he was in better hands with
Mr. Cooke.

la your lordship's recollection so accurate,
as that you are certain, whether what you re-
late fflpised at the first meeting, or whether

some might have occiirred at the second ?-—
I believe the whole may have passed at
the first meeting : he certamly gave notice of
the burial.

So far you are certain ? — ^I am.

And the rest was told by the witness?— It
was.

Cross-examined.

Your lordship recollects, that he told you,
the United Irishmen were busy among gen-
tlemen's servants ; that was at the first meet-
ing?— I cannot recollect; I rather believe
it was.

He told you of the funeral? — He did.

Did he tell you the name of the person to
be buried ? — He did mention the name and
the house ; but I do not recollect them.

He said it was a fictitious funeral? — He
did, I think.

Mr. Attorney General, — My lords, on the
part of the crown, we rest the case here;
unless the evidence for the prisoner makes it
necessary that we should go farther.

DEFENCE.

Mr. JufNally, — Without offering an apo-
loey, for any deficiency on my part, I wiH
aodress you, gentlemen of the jury, while
stating the defence of the prisoner at the bar,
in the mild and plain language of a plain
man, assuming to himself no greater portion
of ability than generally belongs to common
sense : neither will I attempt to engage your
passions, nor endeavour, by any aflfcctaliun of
oratory, to which I make no claim, to lead
your judements from those points which in
my humble comprehension are the points you
are to decide. But I will call your attention
to those points upon which you will have to
determine. And, gentlemen, at the opening
of my clients case, I do think it my duly to
reheve your minds from the apprehension of
a long and laboured speech ; for, while I soli*
cit your attention, I oo also tell you, that I
shall be as concise in what I shall offer as
possible. I say, I will address vou simply, but
I trust not weakly, for I shall address you truty^
and truth has greater force than eloquence; its
'< still small whisper to the ear," sinks into
the heart, and engages the mind to stricter
attention than the loud voice of declamation.

Gentlemen* Mr. Attorney General stated
to you, with his usual perspicuity and preci-
sion, the nature of the offence with which the
prisoner at the bar stands charged in the in-
dictment. He told you the offence was high
treason ; and he stated to you that the indict-
ment contained two species of treason. First,
treason in ** corapassmg and imagining the
death of the king;" and secondly, the treason
of •* adhering to the king's enemies," that is,
adhering, witnin tlie realm, to the persons
exercising the powers of government in
France. Mr. Attorney General laid down to
you, what he considered the true construction
of tlie law npoQ the first count. It is not my

1079] 38 GEORGE lU^

intention, on the present occuion, to contro-
vert tb«t con$tnictiQn, I will not touch upon
the law of treason, and I will as^i^n my rea>
sons. First, I will not controvert it, because
in my judgment, no evidence has been laid
\)efor&you, to supiiort the overt acts of com-
passing and imagining the death of the king,
laid in the indictment; and secondly, I will
not controvert the law on that species of trea-
son> because I know it will be aefined by the
learned judges on the bench, substantially as
the attorney-general has defined it,~it will
come to you construed this dav as it has been
lately construed in England and Ireland — and I
shalf bow with reverence to the opinion of the
king's justices. Permit me, however, my lords,
to say that early in life I was taught to fortn a
construction on the law of high treason, in com-
passing the death of the king, differing most
materially from the law as stated by the at-
torney-^general : and th« construction I have
formed has been recently strengthened in my
mind by one of the most powerful and learn-
ed arguments I ever read, or perhaps, was
ever urged to a court of justice ; I allude to
the defence of Hardy, TheWall, and Tooke;*
if'Aiy judgment be erroneous, that arguvient
bas strengthened my errors; but whatever I
may have received, or whatever I now think
of the law of treason, it having been ruled b^
the bench as the attomey«fenefal has laid it
down, I will not now attempt to enforce my
opinion.

Gentlemen, for the reasons I have offered,
I do accede, in the present case to the defini-
tion given by Mr. Attorney General, of the
law of treason in compassing and imagining
the king's death, convinced I am the con^
struction cannot injure my client ; and I do,
therefore, gentlemen, admit that by the judg-
ment of the Courts, the law does not require,
to support an indictment for compassins and
imagining the death of the sovereign, evicTenoe
to show, that the actual killing of the king was
theotject in contemplatioaof the party charged
with compassing his death ; but that, if there
be unequivocal, undoubted proof, that the ii^
tention of the party was to brins ahovt a revo-
lution, whcrebv the life of the ling mighty by
consequence, be in danger, such intention,
made clear hj overt acts, would, according to
the construction put upon the act of parliar
ment, on which the prisoner is now on trial,
amount to a compassing the death of the
kine. Admttti&g this to be the law, what
willyoiu have to try? I say, admitting the
law, as laid down by the attorney-general, it
will, be for you, gentlemen, to consider whe-
ther there has been sufficient evidence pro-
duced, to convince your consciences^ that the
prisoner at the bar was- concerned in such a
traitorous conspiracy as in its nature (n^
from interference, but facts proved by cmdiblt
witnesses) went to overturn the established
governmentof the country, whereby the life

Trud cf PairickJFmney

[1080

•W I I 1*1

^ See volumes $A and 35 of this CoU^tioQ.

of the king— a king residing in Englandr*-
could be in danger.

As to the other species of treason contained
in the indictment, and charged on the pri-
soner in the second count, that is, *< adhering
to the kind's enemies, within the realm/' that
count requires a very differ^ nt kind of evidence
to give it such effect as will bring the charge
home to the prisoner ; for I do submit to the
Court, that yoq, gentlemen of the jury, cannot
decide against him on that charge upon in-
ferences, probabilities, or deductions; yoo
cannot draw conclusions from facts, however
strong, or however numerous, that there was
an adhering to the king's enemies in which
the prisoner was concerned. No, vou must
have INDUBITABLE PBooF, proof independent
of all question and all doubt of the very hct
of adhering. I say the very identical tact of
adhering must be proved to your satisfactioo.
I say the charge of adhering cannot be sup*
ported but by an accumulation f»f ciicim^
stances.

Gentlemen, I have acceded to the kw laid
down by the attorney -geneml in the fint
charse in the indictment; and, gentlemen, I
do also accede to what tlial learned gentle*
man said when he told you ^ you have an
awful and sacred duty to discharge ;" lor this
is a prosecution carried on by the king, on a
charge of the highest crime, that can be com*
mitted against the person of the king, against
himself. It is not one of those prosecutions
wherein the name of the king is mereW no*
minally used, for the benefit of the pmkhe ;
though the injury is against the seUiect;
therefore, centlemen, awfiil indeed, uid sa-
cred is the duty vou have to discharge, in this
case, where the kins is prosecuting one of the
lowest orders of the people. I say awtlil is
the dutv, but. I well know, men of your
honourable description will recullecl why^
and for what purpose you are ctinvened. You
will not forget that, by the constitution of this
country, a jury is that legal bulwark which
protects the people when threatened by
power, or injured by oppression ; thai a jury
stands between the people and illegal power,
as a constitutional and impregnable basUooi;
a bastion which Cromwell, in the full force of
Wranny could not overthrow; and. vdiicb
Jaines the 8nd, witli all his arts and his sub-
tilties could not sap nor undermine. Gentle-
men, you will recollect thai while jurors re*
main unshaken, while tbc^ stand firai le>>
g^then unawed and incerniptv the conatitu-
tion ofthe country is safe, and so aw the pro-
pertiesi the liberties and the lives of the
people.

Gentlemen, p^mit me to solicit your atten-
tion to another object; it is this: — Your minds
are not to be influenced against the prisonefy
by the atarocity of Ute ofifeace imputed l» him ;
and so Mr. Attorney-general,. with, bis usuel
candor, fairly cautioMd ydn, ta starting the
case for the erowiK Let me iaSieai^ynar
. ponnission to go still facthei ; penai^ineto

1081]

fw Hi^ Treason^

vnaa you with other cautionary obserTalions,
that your Understandines may stand centinel*
upou your hearts, and guard your fMissions
and your prejudices from every influem^e* I
ail vise you, in the name of God, of justice and
of mercy, not to let your minds he impressed
hy any consideration whatever, that does not
come immediately within the true legal mean-*
in^ and intent of that sacred oath you have
this day taken — ^that oath hy which you are
sworn a true deliverance to make between
the king and the prisoner. Remember, gen-
tlemen, you are sworn to decide between the
crown and the prisoner '< according to the
evidence, so help you God V* and therefore, I
say you are to divest your minds of everv cir-
cumstance not in proof before you, of all you
have read, of all you have heird, of every &ct
stated by counsel, that has not been given in
evidence before you on oath ; the task may be
difficult, but it is indispensable. Ador sav-
ing thus much to you, gentlemen, I have still
much to combat with; and you have much to
combat with. I have to o6mbat with those
impressions which k>yalty makes on the
honest and patriotic mind. I have to combat
with influences resulting from public reports,
but whether these have proceeded from pri«
vate committees of the House of Lords, or
private committees of the House of Corn-
mons ; from these and from every thing ex-^
trinsic to the evidence you have heard, it is
yoiirduty to divest your minds»

There is another consideration to whkh,
gentlemen, I will presume to guWe your at-
tention. You have heard the inoictmeni
read, implicating the fwisoner in no lese thail
thirteen open ara specifie sets of high treason i
but, gentlemen, you are to exnunge from
your minds every one of those charges, ex-
cept such as are supported by irrefragable
evidence ; and you will be directed by the
Court to deliberate, and of course to decide
on those facts onfy to whkh you give ere*
dence, that is if you believe any of €mm to be
satisfactorily proved.

Gentlemen, I shall now put to you the
question which I conceive you- have to decide
upon. In doing this I do not assume to my-
self the merit of composioe that question ;
but, I will put it to you boTdly, though not
abfy. I put it not, I say, as coming from my-
self, • no, I advert to an aurhority hi^h and
respectable iMleed ; an afrthority to which the
counsel at the Irish bar, because they admire
leamingandrespectHberty,will pay deference,
and to which you, gentlemeft of Che juryj
wilK I trust, pay attention; On the renefit
trials for high treasott, in London, the-altor^
ne^-general put the question to the jviy
honourably and proudR. He pat the ques-
tion to them proudly, because it was fonnded
on principles of Br^isb litktty and personal
security, which should make every iilgRsll^
man proud. I wtll state his word*-->* It
will be for you, geirtlemen of thejury, to try
Bpon thie occaskn wlfether the evert^adb^aare

A. D. 1798. [1094

made out as they are laid, hy that ample and
sufficient leeal testimony which, I thank God,
the law of England has required to be given
to an English jur^ :'' and then bursts forth
the holiest pride of the English lawyer, mark
how he concludes : ** whenever an English-
man is on trial for his life.*?

I have stated that he put the question
proudly; I will tell you wny I stated it ^o,
and it will lead your minds to consider a par-
tial distinction between the adntinistration of
the law of England and of the law of Ireland,
on trials for high treason ; a distinction that
will come with force to your minds, and with
favour to the prisoner. Bear this observation
in vour deliberations, that the law of Ireland
is rounded on the same principles with the
law of England ; and therefore, though the
statute bc^ks of Ireland do not protect the
people with those wholesome provisions with
which the English parliament has tie^ulated
trialS'for hiffh treason; "^et I maihtam that
the principles of law being in both countries
the same, you ^ jurors nave authorltv t#
decide according to those principles, and od
those principles you have authority to acquit
the prisoner.

What are the reasons which elate an attdr-
nc^-general of England with honest nuinly
pride when he states the law of treason to an
English jury? I wRl tell you what ttiakea
him proud : he is proud of the setfority which
the law, in such cases, insures to the iiino-
cent. I will crve you an ides df that law.
Gentlemen, if^tbe prisoner at the bar had
been tried in England for high tf-eason,
though an Irishman, he would have been
sheltered b;^ all the privileges of an English-
man, in a similar sitaatiorf— privileges whkh
he cannot have here, in his own Cduntry.
Had Pktrkk Finney been tried In l^ngland
for high treason, he would have had delivered
to him previous to his arraignment, a copy of
the panel from which the Junr were to be
select ; he would, as matter of right, not of
fkvour, have been furnished hy fhc crown,
with a list of their names, their additions ana
their places of abode; all these matters
would have been made knowii 16 him in
order that he might, by his a^ent and his
friends, inquire into the private lives and pub-
lic characters of his triers. An Irishm&n has
no such privilege in his own country. An
Englishman accused of high treasdjl has no
such privifege in Ireland ! An Engfishman
would have a list delivered to him of all the
witnesses summoned, on the pari of the
crown, to give evidence against him, in order
that if any of them were men of infambus re-
putation, he might be able to impeach their
credit by evidence, and thereby enable the
jury to decide whether they were to be
Deneved upon their oaths. Gentlemen, 1
wifl venture to say, had the, prisoner at the

bar such a privileged, your honest fivinds and

■ *i - —

* Sec StWTc^ealsd, dn^^ V6l. 85, p\ WO.

1083] S8 GEORGE III.

generous feelings would not this day have
een insulted and irritated by the evidence of
such wretches as O'Brien and Clarke, whom
you saw, whom you hoard, and whom I trust
you disbelieve : but not having that reason-
able notice which by statute is allowed in
England, to every man tried fur high treason,
the prisoner could not make any great dis-
covery of the intended perjury, the villainy,
the infamy of the witnesses who were pro-
duced agamst him. But, gentlemen, when
his, witnesses presently came forward to show
you the little they could learn of the prosecu-
tors characters, taking into your consideration
the principle upon which the English statute
was founded, that is, the protection of the
innocent from fblse accusers, and taking it as
a principle of Irish jurisprudence, you will
decide upon .that principle, you will stand his
protectors in place of a statute, and you will,
as friends to justice and to mercy, decide, not
upon any defect in the evidence produced for
the prisoner, but you will acquit upon the
principles of English law, which gives to a
prisoner the privilege I have stated ; you will
acquit because an Irishman ought not to be
Convicted, by an Irish jury, on evidence upon
which an Enclish jury would be directed by
an English judge to deliver a verdict of not
guilty!

Gentlemen, two observations more on this
subject. In England a prisoner under trial
for hieh treason has by the common law
thlrty-Bve challenges; in Ireland he is re-
stricted, by statute, to twenty. In Eneland
he cannot be convicted without the evidence
of two witnesses to one overt- act, or one wit-
ness to one; and another witness to another
overt-act of the same species of treason. How
is it in Ireland ?— In Ireland, a man of the
first situation, fortune, and character, may be
tried and attainted, as a traitor, on the un-
supported evidence of a single witness, and
that witness a common informer, or a parti-
cept criminiSf swearing to save his own life.
It may be said thei-e are two witnesses here
—but I say one witness only has given evi-
dence of treason, for if Clarke has credit,
which I am convinced he has not, he proved
a felony by statute, not an overt-act of high
treason, but as to that I shall observe pre-
sently.

Gentlemen, there are circumstances in the
indictment worthy of observation, on which I
shall however only slightly touch. It is a
fact which no man of common sense will at
this day attempt to deny, for it is a fact uni^
versally known, that a society of persons,
staling themselves <« United Irishmen,'* do
exist \n this country; and, as appears by
their publie declarations and other tests, have
associated for the purpose of endeavourine to
form ^ brotherhood of affection amonc Irish-
men of every religious persuasion ; and to ob-
tain an equal, foil and adequate representa-
tion of all the people of Ireland. Of that
fact the crown has given evidence, and the

Trial of Patrick Finney

[108t

test of the aociety has l»een read. This society
or association has been construed traitorous :
and to lay a ground*work fur such construc-
tion, to impress the jury, it has been artfully
laid, in the introductory part of the indict-
ment, that the prisoner, Patrick Finney,
'* falsely, maliciously, and troiiorousljfj did
join, unite, and associate himself to and witli
divers other false traitors, and enter into and
become of a party calling themselves ' United
* Irishmen,' for the purpose of aiding, assist-
ing, and adhering to the persons exercising
the powers of government in France." To
this assertion, tor it is no more than asser-
tion, for there has been no proof given Uiat
United Irishmen are traitors; I say to this as-
sertion, as a general antecedent, every suc-
ceeding overt act adverts ; and, gentlemen,
you must have perceived, while the iodtct-
roent was reading, that the fact of United
Irishmen being traitors, is artfully laid in
every overt act; and that each succeeding
overt act adverts to the first. They all run,
that the said Patrick Finney, A. B. and C.
beiu^ such traitors as aforesaid, that is, being
*' United Irishmen,'' did assemble as afore-
said, trying to show to you that traitors and
United Irishmen are one and the- same cha-
racter, and that they meet for the traitonnis
purposes charged upon them by the indict-
ment. Gentlemen, is there any proof of this P
and, gentlemen, if there be no proof of this
charge, must not the whole fabric of this in^
dictment, erected upon this fictitious founda-
tion, crumble into ruin } I trust this observa-
tion will be received, by you, with full force.
I trust you will differ in opinion from the in-

fenious lawyer, whoever he may be, that
rew the indictment, and I therefore am con-
fident that though you should believe, and no
doubt you do believe, that the Prisoner at the
bar did belong to the society or United Irish-
men, yet, as there is no proof, you will not
believe that he did belong to such a society
as a traitor, though as such he is artfully and
unjustly charged in the indictment. Yon
will say, " we cannot convict this man of high
treason, though we believe him to be a sworn
United Irishman." Gentlemen, I will show
vou the reasons why you will say so; first,
because there is no evidence to convince you,
that the Society of United Irishmen associated
for traitorous purposes ; and secondly, because
there are two acts of parliament upon which
the prisoner might have been indicted for
administering or tendering the oath or obliga*
tion of the society. It may be said, " that is
matter of law,"-^ suppose it is — ^you the jury
have a right, in a criminal case, to decide
upon the law, as well as upon the fact, the
law invests you with, that right, and God fur*
bid it did not! In saying this I am not
wishing to insinuate that you should not at-
tend With deference and respect to the law,
as it is laid down to you by the learned
judges, mercifiillv it will be laid down, I know;
but, geotlemeni I say, the prisoner cannot be

1085]

for High Trituon.

A. D. 1798.

[loss

convicted as a traitor, merely because it ia
proved be is a sworn United IrishmaiK for as
I before stated, there are two acts of parlia-
ment existing in this kingdom, under one of
which the prisoner, for administerins or
tendering an oath or obligation might nave
been transported for life* and under the other,
might have been handed as a felon; for by
the Utter act the very tact of administering an
illegal oath or obligation is made felony with-
out benefit of clergy, which shows it is not an
overt act of treason, though subtilly iniro-
duced as such into this indictment.

Gentleman, I am proceeding now to state
to you the statute on which Patrick Finney
stands indicted. It is called the statute of
treasons, and it was enacted so hi back as
ilie S6th year of Edward the 3rd. This act,
this guardian of the commonwealth, creates
no novel right, gives no new privilege to the
people. It is a declaratory statute, a statute
declaratory of the ancient wholesome com-
mon law, and I state it to be such, in the
hearing of the bar and in the hearing of the
bench, confident that the position can not be
controverted. I state, that this statute of
the 26th of Edward the Srd, was made in
consequence of subtile and illegal constructions
which servile and corrupt judges, under the in-
fluence of superior powers, put upon the law
of treason, by which the people were en-
trapped, not knowing what was, or what was
not treason as heretofore in the case of libel
or no libel : and, gentlemen, to relieve the
people from this oppressive grievance, the
legisdaturiB in the first instance, as in the se-
cond, passed an act to tell the peonle what
was and wliat was not treason ; and tnerefore
nothing, that has not been made treason by
act of parliament, subsequent to the fi5tii of
Edward the 3rd, can be construed into treason
at this day.

Treason being thus defined, circumscribed
and made certam, by this declaratory statute,
it is unnecessary for me to lay bdbre you
what was treason at common law. The two
offences charged upon the prisoner are each
of them high treason by the statute ; let us
see then, how and in what manner he is to
be convicted according to the law of the
statute. The statute says, ^ that every man
charged with the above treasons'^-^compass-
ing and imagining the death of the king, and
adhering to the king's enemies—^ shall not
be attamt but hy prooeabU evidence," and
lord Coke, commenting on these words of the
statute, says, ** the prisoner must be con-
victed, not upon coi^ectural presumptions on
inferences or strains of wit" — In those days,
sentlemen, those strains of wiL mentioned
py lord Coke, were not strains of^ wit accord*
.ing to the modern acceptation of the word ;
thiy were those strains of influence and con-
struction which disgrace the State trials,
which have disffracedlord Coke himself, ana
by which men nave suffered the pains and
penalties of treason; but they are now ex-

ploded, and men, I trust, will never suffer so
again ! Lord Coke goes on and says, ^ the
words of the statute are not that he shall be
probably attainted, for there a common infers
enee might serve, but praoeahljf attaintedf,"-^
What does proveabfy attainted meanP On its
meaning the prisoner's life may depend — I
am not ashamed to adopt the language of any
man, of whose abilities and judgment I have
a better opinion than of my own — I will there-
fore give you the true meaning of that tech-
nical comment of lord Coke, m a precision
and an elegance of laneuage I cannot pre-
tend to — I say proveab^ attaint is ** not by
that demonstration of evidence which belongs
to matter of science ; but that moral demon-
stration without which no man can sleep who
has given a verdict of Guilty." — Let those
words sink deep into your minds, that the
kind of evidence which has come before you;
this day, Is perhaps probable^ but certainly
noi proveablef and praveabU evidence is tho
onlv kindof evidence, as the learned judges
will presently tell you, on which you can
legally and conscientiously decide, and bring
in a verdict against the prisoner; for on
probable evidence you are implicitly bound to
acquit — and you will acquit.

Uentlemen, I will lay down for your con-
sideration a broader scale of evidence than
the counsel for the crown may wish to adopt*
I will venture to tell you,— -the Court will
correct me if I am in error,— that before you
can decide on a verdict of guilty, you are not
only to be convinced that the prisoner has
committed some one of those overt acts of
treason, but also that each overt act was com-
mitted by him with the treasonable intent
charged upon him by the indictment — and
therefore though you should believe that
every tiling, stated by the wimesses for the
crown, were strictly true, and that would
imply that these witnesses deserved credit,
yet should you not believe that it was all done
by traitors, with an intent to overturn the
government by bringing in a foreign enemy,
the law is that you must acquit the prisoner;
for, gentlemen, the <*har^e set forth in the
indictment is, that the prisoner being a false
traitor, did intend to overturn the government
by aiding and abetting the persons exercising
the powers of government in France, in case
they should invade this kingdom. On this
point I will submit to your judgments, an
illustration of my argument, the declared opi-
nion of a truly honest Englishman, and a
great lawyer, Sir John Scott, publicly pro*
mulged on a trial for high treason. His words
are : — ^ You cannot, whatever may have
been the conduct of the prisoner, convict
him of the treason with which he is charged,
unless you are satisfied of the wicked pur-
poses of his heart; and that the acts that he
did, were done by him with a full knowledge
of the dangerous and malignant purpose to
which they were directed, with a deliberate
intention in his mind of overturning the go-

1087] 38 GEORGE III.

wrMDMt, and theffciby eoatpawing and i
^aing the death of the king/' Yon lutist
Bot only then, gentlemen^ believe ^b& facts
tahave be«a coranitted, but you mu&t, to
adopt the words of the noble character I
have auoled, beliere U was for bo other pur-
pose Inaa to overturn the goveromei>t, ia the
fidl matijgnity of a base heart. — Gentlemen,
if you find him guilty at all, you must find
that awful verdict, not merely on his evert
acts, but on his intention ; for he cannot be
niilty of the overt act without first conceiving
the intention, and the intention, I will ven-
ture to say^ in. a criniinftl case, is not only the-
tssenoe of the crime charged upon a pri-
soner, but is matter of fact, upon which the
jury, and the jury alone, are competent to
ilecide»

FromwJiatI have stated to you, gentle-
men, arisea a subject for your most serious
consideration indeed^-and that is the degree
of credit due to the witnesses who have been
this day examinedi against the priseaer. A
noble lord. was produced avowedly to support
the testimony of OBrieu,. the informer; for,
eentlemen, it was no.* doubt foreseen, b^
those wha conduct the prosecution, that his
evidence would want support When yo«
retire.to the jury^Koom you wiU compare what
was deposed on: oath by the noble lord, with
what was sworn: to by the infonner, and you
^n then decide, upon the solemn and reli-
gious obligation you have taken, whether
what theyliave both sworn this diy can be
tnie and consistent. And when I call your
minds tOi this comparative view of theevi.
denoe, as the guide of yous decision, when
deliberatinf^ on your verdict, Lam not back-
vrard in saying that you must give credit to
the nohls lund and nject the evidence of
O'Biian, the informer, aa false.

Oift that point I will make a few observa*
liona, £ will, call to your recolleotiDn the evi«
denoe of OBfeien, and state where his contra-
diotioBs are to.be found— He swore be bad no
knowledge of. the intent to seize on the ord-
naaceimhe Caatte, until the third meeting
«if the societies— but mark, lord Portarlington
slated to vou, on his oath, to, which I am
oonvinced you will give implicit credit, that
at the first meeting 0*Brien did mention that
ohrcumstanoe : these are hislonUhip's words :
** I recollect he mentioned something of aa
attack upon tho areecml, that at the second
interview nothings material passed, and at the
third nffthtorpassed . that his lordship oocdd
reoelleot.'' Gentlemen, you must have oh*
sefved'the mann^ in which this miscreant
eeaduded hb testitnonvi Did you not remark
him with impatient zeal and eagevness, seoe-
limesanticipatifng the questions put to him by
tkt couasei for the crown at other timeaan^
sweriog befosa the Question was • finished ?
Didyoiiohservehowhesat upon his* cbair^
featiesf aqd enshrined in his own impudence ;
ibrtified^by audacity and impunity? Did you
mark ho(w he answered Mr. Cunan on^ his

Trial of Pairkl' Finney

[108S

cross-euunioaUoD } And did you not see witb
what reluctance truth was extracted ffom
him, and that he wae lereed to confess fkcta
which established his falsehood ^ Why, gen-
tlemen, bis manner and behaviour impeaches
his veracity as strongly as bis contradictiona !

Gentlemen, let me remind you of the cha-
racter which Mr. 0*Bf ien was obliged to give
of himself; ^ I came,*' said he, *< to an in-
dependent situation by the death of my
^ father"-*Then he told you, he disposed of
hisainheritance-^became a common soldier—
a common, drunkard, and now, genUemen, he
ia a common informer !

You heard this witness, who acknowledged
that dniakenness had been the marked con-
duct of his life^ you heard him insinuate
something against Mr. Roberts, whom -he
expected to see here as a witness, which was
the excuse for that insinuation— 1 believe bis
wonis were these : <' I wtil selUe him if he
gives me a bad character." Mr. Curran asked
him,. " Ifiad^you a sword oir pistols about you
when you threatened to settle Mr. Kofaerte ?"
— He answered, ** I had a sword." — Mr.
Curmn a^ed him, ** Had: you a pistol ?" —
He equivocated; his answer to the questioB
was; '^ I don^t doubt but I might have had
Qiie, but I did not mean to settle him by
sword or pistol ; but he did somethings at an
auction." Mr. Bioberts was to have been
settled for something, or for nothing,, he had
done at aa. auction; and this something, or
this nothing, the informer would have oon-
verted into a felony. What is the true con*
structioft of this evidence ^— GenUemen, it is
this: I'he informer, that is the witoess
O'Brien, has told you, he might have mur-
dered Mr. Boberta with his sword or his
pistol, but there v%8 a likelier way to be re-
venged of him«-What way^ — ^Why he mi^ht
have sworn away his life by legal prosecution
— nmrder him aa he has attenmted to murder
my olientK-muider him by ibrm of bvv—
Yes, gestliboMn, the informer had his choice
*-«arms or legal process*— he might have put
him to death by sword or pistol, for daring to

give him a bad character^ orhe might muraer
im bv' fimn efi law — by bearing fidse wit-
ness-against him'— he might murder him by
perjury.

• Gentieroeov I do not eontrovert, that
Offirien is what the law oalls a oompeteni,
that i% an admissible witnesa; but bis com-
pelcitq^ is not with you— you; are to decide on
his crediMiy^ But wliy 19 this reptile com-
petent?—4>ecause,. notwithstanding the mul-
titude and enormity of bis crimes-, God has
not visited him with vengeance^— because the
law« has not pursned him to conviction for
cmy of his atrocities. If O'Brien^ had been
convicted -of coining, or of an^ other felony,
he could net' have been examined -as a wit-
aany he.wouhl have beea inaoRipetfrnt,.aiid,
ott preduciDg' the record of laa-coitvictionv the
venerable judges of the bench would have
tokl you, be could not be exaitiined at all.

1105]

for H^rh Trtasmi

A. D* 1798.

[1106

wM itlack dirunk ag^nst his inclinatioii. Thus
was be bese'iRed with united beef-steaks and
whiskey, ana aoiinst such potent assailants
not even Mr. O'Brien could prevail.

Whether all this whiskey that he has been
forced to drink has produced the effect or not,
Mr. CBrien^s loyalty is better than his me-
mory. In the spirit of loyalty he became
prophetic, and told to lord Portarlineton the
circumstances relative to the intended attack
on the ordnance stores fbll three weeks before
be had obtained the information through
inortal agency. Oh ! honest James O'firien !
— honest James O'Brien ! Let others vunlv
argue on logical truth and ethical falsehood,
but if I can once fasten him to the ring of
perjury, I will bait him at it, until his testi-
mony shall fail of producing a verdict, althoush
human nature were as vile and monstrous m
jrou as she is in him ! He has made a mittake /
but surely no man's life is safe if such evidence
were admissible} what argument can be
founded on his testimony, when he swears
he has peijured himself f I must not believe
bim at all, and by a paradoxical conclusion,
suppose, against '* the damnation'' of his own
testimony, that he is an honest man ! [Ano-
ther of the prisoner's counsel having here
suggested somethine to Mr. Curran, he con-
tinued] My learnea friend supposed me to
he niistaken, and confounding the evidences
of O'Brien and Clark, but I am not ; I advert
to what O'Brien said to lord Portarlington, re-
specting the attack on the arsenal.

Strongly as I feel my interest keep pace
with that of my client, I would not defend
him at the expence of truth ; I seek not to
make O^Brien worse than he is ; whatever he
may be, Ood Almighty convert his mind!
91 ay his reprobation — but I beg his paitlon,
let your venlict stamp that currency on his
credit ; it will have more force than any ca-
sual remarks of mine. How this contradic-
tion in Mr. O'Brien's evidence occurred I am
at no loss to understand. He started from
ihe beginning with an intention of informing
against some person no matter against whom ;
and whether he ever saw the prisoner at the
time he ^ve the information to lord Port-
arlington is a question; but none, that he fa-
bricated the story for the purpose of imposing
ou the honest Eeal of the law oiicers of the
crown.

Having now glanced' at a part of this roan's
evidence, I do not mean to part with him en-
tirely, I shall have occasion to visit him again;
but before t do, let me, gentlemen, once more
impress upon your minds the observation
which my colleague applied to the laws of
high treason, that if they are not explained on
the Statute book, they are explained on the
hearts of all honest men; and, as St. Paul
sf^s, '' tnough they know not the law, they
obey tlie statutes thereof." The essence of -
the charge submitted to your .consideration
tends io thexiissolution of the connexior^ be-
tween Ireland and Great Britain.
VOL. XXVI.

. ^ I own, it is with much .warmth and self-
zratulation, that I feci ihis calumny amwered
by the attachment of every good man lo the
British constitution. I feel, I embrace its
principles ; and when I look on you, the proud-
est benefit of that constitution, I am relieved
from the fears of advocacy, since I place my
client under the influence of its sacred shade.
This is not the idle sycophancy of words — It
is not crying " Lord ! Lord !" but doing " the
will of my ^ther who is in heaven.'* If my
client were to be tri^d by a jury of Ludgate-
hill shop-keepers, he would ere now be in his
lodging. The law of England would not suf-
fer a man to be cruelly butchered in a court of
justice. The law ot England recognizes the
possibility of villains thirsting for the blood
of their fellow-creatures ; and the people of
Ireland have no cause to be increaulous of
the fact. Thus it is, that in England two
witnesses are essential to the proof of high
treason ; and the poorest wretch that crawls
on British eround, has this protection between
him and those vampyres who crawl out of
their graves in search of human blood. If
there be but one witness, there is the les.« pos-
sibility of contradicting him — he the less fear^
any detection of his murderous tale, having
only infernal communication between him
and the author of all evil ; and when on the
table, which he makes the altar of his sacri-
fice, however common men may be affected
at sight of the innocent victim, it cannot be
supposed that the prompter of his perjury will
instigate him to retribution : — this is the law
in England, and God forbid that Irishmen
shouldso differ, in the estimation of the law,
from Englishmen, that their blood is not
equally worth preserving.

I do not, gentlemen, apply any part of this
observation to you ; you are Irishmen your-
selves, and, I know you will act proudly and
honestly. Why the law of England renders
two witnesses necessary, and one witness iu^
sufficient, to take away the life of a man, on
a charge of high-treason, is founded on the
principleof common sense and common jus-
tice ; for, unless the subject were guarded by
this wise prevention, every wretch who coulcif
so pervert the powers of invention, as to
tnimp up a tale of treason and conspiracy,'
woula have it in his power to defraud tlie
crown into the mo^t aoominable and afflict-
ing acts of cruelty and oppression i

Gentlemen of the Jury, though from the
evidence which has been adduced against the'
prisoner they have lost their valuej yet, had
they been necessary, I must tell you, that my
client came forward under a disadvantage of
great magnitude, the absence of two witnesses'
very material to his defence — I am not now
at liberty to say, what, I am instnicted, would
have been proved by May, and Mr. Roberts..
—Why is not Mr. Roberts here ?— Recollect*
the admission, of O'EtFiCn, that he threatened .
tQ tettte him, and you wiH cease to wonder tti
his absence, when^ if lie came ,the dagger was
4 B

1 107] 38 GEORdfi ttl.

in pre()aralion to be plunged Into his heart.
, I said Mr. Roberts was absen) ; 1 correct mj-
self— No ! in effect he is here : I appeal to
the heart of that obdurate man, what would
have been his testimony if he had dared to
venture a personal evidence on this trial?—
Gracious God ! Is a tyranny of ibis kind to be
borne with, where law is said to exist? Shall
the horrors which surround the informer^ the
ferocity of his countenance, and the terrors of
his voicCy cast such a wide and appalling in-
fluence, that none dare approach and save
the victim which he marks for ignommy and
death r

Now^gentlemen, be ^pleased to look to the
rest of 0%rien's testimony : be tells vou there
are one hundred and eleven thousano men, in
one province, added to ten thousand of the in-
habitants of the metropolis, ready to assist
the object of an invasion. What! gentlemen,
do you think there are so many m one pro*
vince — so many in your city, combined a^mst
their country r At such a time as this, do
j^ou think it a wise thing to say, on the evi-
dence of the abominable G'Brien, that if the
enemy were to invade this country, there are
one hundred and eleven thousand men ready
to run tb his standard ? But this is not the
most appalling view of the question : — For its
hnportance, and its novelty, this is the most
unprecedented trial in tne annals of this
country. I recollect none beariig any affi-
nity to it, save that of the unhappy wanderer,
Jackson : and, premising that I mean not the
smallest allusion to the conduct of public mea-
sures in this country, are you prepared, I ask
jrou seriously, are you prepared to embark
your respectable characters m the same bot-
tom with this detestable informer? Are you
ready qn stich evidence to take away, one by
•ne, the lives of an hundred thousand men,
by prosecutions in a court of justice? Are
you prepared, when 0*Brien shall come for-
ward against ten thousand of your fellow-citi-
yens, to ass'tst him in digging the graves, which
he has destined to receive them one by one?
No ! could your hearts yield for a moment to
the suggestbn, ^our own reflectioiis w^puld
"vindicate the justice of God, aud the insulted
character of man ; you would fly from the se-
crets of vour chamber, and take refuge in the
multitude, from those ** compunctious visit-
ings," which meaner men could not look on
without horror. Do not think I am speaking
disrespectfully of you when I say that while
an O^Brien may be found, it mav be the lot of
the pfoudest among you to be m the dock in-
stead of the jury box ; bow then on such an
occasion would any of you feel, if such evi-
4ence as has been heard this day yr€te adduc-
ed against you ?

The application ftifects you— you shrink
from the imaginary situation-premember
then the .great mandate of your religion, and
" do unto all men a^ you would they should
dc» utito you.*? Why do you condescend to
listen to me wHh such attention ? Why so

Trial qfPalrkk Pinnetf

{1108

anjcious. If even from me toy thing sliould
fall tending to enlighten you on the present
awfiil occasion ?— ft is, because, bound by the
sacred obligations of an oath, your hearts will
not allow yon to forfeit It. Have you anjr
dod)t that it is the object of OlSrien to take
down the prisoner for the reward that fol-
lows? Have you not seen with what more
than instinctive keenness this blood-hotrod
has pursued his rictim? — how he has kept
him in view from place to place, until be
hunts him through the avenues of the court
to where the unhappy man stands now, hope-
less of all succour nut that which your Termct
shall afford. I have heard of assassraatioa
by s^ord, by pistol, and by dagger, hot here
is a wretch who wonld dip the evangelists ia
blood— if he thinks he has not sworn his vic-
tim to death, he is ready to swear, vnthout
mercy and without end ; but oh ! ao itet, I
conjure you, sutler him to take an oath ; tiie
hand of the murderer should not pelhite the
purity of the gospei ; if he will swear, let it be
on the knife, the proper symbol of fads profes-
sion ! Gentlemen, I am reminded of the
tissue of abomination, with which this 'deadly
calumniator, this O'Brien, has endeavoured
to load so large a portion of your adult coun-
trymen. He charges one hundred thousand
Iiishmen whh the deliberate cruelty of de-
priving their fellow-^^reatures of their eyes,
tongues, and hands ! Do not believe the in-
famous slander ! If I were told that there
was in Ireland one man who could sa debase
human nature, i should hesitate to believe
tha[t even O'Brien were he. I bate heajrd the
ai^ttieiit made use of, that, hi cases of k veiy
foul nature, witnesses cannot be found free
from imputation ; this admitted in its full^l
extent, it does not follow that such evidence
is to be accredited without other support In
such cases strong corroboration is necessary,
and you would be the most helpless and un-
fortunate men in the world, if you were under
the necessity of attending to the solitary tes-
timony of such witnesses : In the present
prosecution two witnesses have been exa-
mined ; for the respectable character of lord
Portarlington must not be polluted by a com-
bination with O'Brien : if^ his lordship had
told exactlv the same story with 0*Bnen, it
could not, however, be eoosidered as corro-
borating O'Brien, who might as easily have
uttered a falsehood to lora Poflarhngton as
he did here ; but how much mort stronfly
must you feel yourselves bound to n^ect his
evidence, when, appealing to his lortlshlp, he
is materially (Contradicted, and his p^rjtuv es-
tablished f— and What did he telMord Port-
arlington? or rather what had lord Portarling-
ton told you ?— that O'Brien did stat^ to hiia
the proiect OfYobbing the ordnance sipitte time
before he could possibly have kno^#ii it him-
si^lf. And it Is material that he sirorr oo the
t^ble that be did net know of the plet till his
thifd meeting; with the Societies, ftOd 'lord
PortarKngton sweaifs that he tpfd it f o' hiiu

f

I109]

ff^ Hjtgh Frfwon.

-A. D* i79&.-

tuio

o« iba fiml inUrtiew wHb him s tbert the
oooti^dictionof O'Bri^abj lord Portarlingtoa
U aiatcrialy aod Ihe tettimony of l<9tl PorUr-
liogkM) rosy be put oiit of the caae, except so
far M it oontrmhcta that of O'BrieQ,

Mr* Justice Chfim^rUwa^'—W is loateriaJy
Mr. Gumuiy that lord Portarlingtoa did oot
awear positively it was at the first interriewy
but that he was inclined U> believe it was so*

Mr. C«rTa]|«*-Your lordship will recoUfct
that be said 0*Brieo did not say any thing of
GQim^queiioa at aoy of the other ioteirviews;
but, I Mit bis lofdsbip out of the ciuestioq, so^
iiur as he does not contradict O'Bnea, and be
does «o. If I am stating any thiny throi^
aaistiakei I would wish to be act rigbt; but,
lord Portarlin^lon jaid he did oot recollect
•oy thing of importance at apy subsequent
meetinif ; and as far as he goes, be does beyond
contrsoMtioQ establish tm ialse swearing of
O'Brien* I am strictly light in statipg the
coQiradietioQ ; so far as it can be compared
with the testimony of 0*Bri?n, it does weaken
ii; and therefore I wiU ifave it there, and
put loid Portarlington out t>f the question ;
that is, as if he had not beeq examined at all,
but where he differs from ihe evidence gWen
by (yBrien.

Aa to the witness Clark, aAer ilU beba4
sworp» 3|F09 cannot but be satisfied be has bqi
saki a single word materially agaioat the pri?
soner; he has not gifen any copfirmatofy
evid^Ke ia. support of any one overt apt bud
in the iadKlmeot. Yea have them upon
yo«r minds» be has Dot said one wjord as to
the. various meetings, levying money, ot
scoding persons to Fnmce; and, therefore, I
do warn you a^^nst giving it that attention
A»r. which it has beeiftinjtroduced.< U0^4oes
qot make a second witoess. Oentlemeo» In
alluding to the evidenoe of Lord PortarUngr
ton» wmch I have alrtady mcmtioned, I was
bound to make some observations. On the
avideoce.of Clark I am ftlso obli^^ to dp the
same^ because he has epdeavouiod to prt^u^
dice your miods by an endeavour to slidain
evidence of what does not by any menus
come within this ceae; that is amaiignant
end0avottr, to impute an bwrid trans^^^tion^
the murder of a man of the name of Tboropr
son, to the prisoner at the bar; but I do conr
jure you to consider what motives tbeieean
be for msittuatmns of this sort, and why SMcb
a transaction, so renoU from the case before
you» should be endeavoured to be impressed
on your minds. Gentlemen, I aip not blink;>
ing the queition, I come boldly up to it; and
I ask you, in the preeence of Um Court and
of your God, is there op^ word of evidsooB
Uiat bears the shadow of such a chvirge as the
murder of that unfortunsAe man, to the pri-
soner at the bar ? Is tbeM one word to show
bow be died, whether bgr force, or by any
other means? Is tbent a word bow he came
to hia endp Is thene a word to bring a shadow
of suspicion that can be attached to thi prir
ioiKMrl There is no^ the most camote avi*

denaa to connect the &Ae of Thompson with
Ute present case, and nothing could show the
miserable paucity of his evidence, more thau
seekix^ to support it on what did not at all
relate to the charge. Gentlemen,' my client
has been deprived of the ben^t of a witness,
Mav (you nave heard of it), who, had tho
trial been postponed, might Iiave been able tq
attend ; we hsive not been able to examine
him, but you may guess wh^l he would have^
said ; he would have disaedited the informes
O'Sriep. The evidence of O'Briai ou^ht to
be supported by collateral circumstances. It
is not ; and though Roberta is not here, ye(
you may conjecture what he would have said,
put, gentlemen, I have examined five wit*
nesses, and it does seem as if there had been
some providential interference carried on \\k
bringing fi\% witnesses to ^ntradipt 0'Briei>
in his tmtimony, as to oire^t matters of facC
if his testimony could be put in competitiQ4
with direct positive evklence, O'Brien sai^f
he knew nothing of ordering back apy piopej
\a Margaret Moore ; he dej^ied that fact. T^e
woman was examined, what did she sajr oii
the table, in the presence of 0*Brien? That
^ ao order was made, and :the money refunded,
after the magistrate had abused bun fur hia
conduct.'' What woq14 you think of yo^if
servant, if you found him committinK ^uch
perjury^ would you believe him? Wbatd^
ypu think of this fact \ O'Brien depies h^
luoew any thing of the money being refundeo)!
what does Mrs. Moore sajr F That afVer thp
magistrate h^d al^use4 . him for his oondpcV
the money was lefiui^ed, and that " she and
P'Brien walked down stairs together P' If
ibis ^ accidei^tal trip; a little stopible oif
conscience : or, is it not downright, wilfiil
perjuiy? What said Mr. Clark? | hid the
foundation of the evidence by a^kioJB; O'Brien,
did you ever pass for a levenueofficefp t
c^ll, gentlemen, on your knowledge of th^
bumafi diaractar, and of human fifo; what
was jdie conduct of t|ie nian^ Was it whait
you would have acted, if you had been called
on in a cour^ of justice \ pid he ai^swer mp
candidly F Do ypu remember \a& mai^ier^
^ No^ sir, that \ remember; U could not b^
whei^ I was sober.*' Did you dp it at all^
What was the answer— <' I mighty air, havp
donp it; buit |[ mpsf havis been drupk. I
oever did any ihing dishone&t.'' Why did hn
answer thus ? Becaiusa he did imagiue he
would have been opposfed in his tesUmony :
He not only added perjury to his prevarica-
tion, but be added robbery to both* See now
in Dublin there are at this nuMuent tbousanc^
and tons d* thousands of your leljow citizen^,
anxiously by, waiting to know if you will cob^
vict the prisoner on the evidence of a wilful
and corrupt perjurer ? W bother they are, each
in his turn, to feel the fa^ effects of bis cou-
demnatioB, or whether thay are to find pro-
tection in the laws from the machinations of
the v^mrmtr f [Mr. Currap having been ca-

miadpd to obianra ao the recipe for caioiog]*

nil] 38 GEORGE III.

No ! oontinued he, let him keep his coining
for himself; it will not pass in common with
other pieces — it suits him well, and is the
proper emblem of his conscience, copper*
washed.

What has O'Brien said ? " I never remem-
ber that I did pretend to be a revenue officer ;
but 1 remember there was a man said some-
thing about whiskey; and I remember, I
threatened to complain, and he was a little
frightened, and he eave me three and three-
pence!"^-^! asked him, '' Did his wife give
yon any thing?" — " There was three and
three-pence between them." " Who gave vou
the money ?" *' It was all I got from both of
them." — Gentlemen, would you 'let such a
fellow as this into your house as a servant,
under the impressions which his evidence
must make on your minds? Suppose one of
3'ou wanted a servant, and went to the other
to get one; and suppose you heard that he
personated a revenue officer; that he had
threatened to become an informer against per-
sons not having Ktences, in order to extort
monejT to compromise the actions^ would you
take him as a servant f

' If you would not take his services in ex-
change for wa^es, will you take his perjury in
exchanse for the life of a fellow creature ? —
How t^ul you feel, if the assignats of such evi-
dence pass current for human blood? How
will you bear the serrated and iron fangs of
remorse, gnawing at your hearts, if, in the
moment of ab^naonm.ent, you sufier the vic-
tim to be roassiacred even in our arms. But
has his perjury stopped here ? What said the
innocent countryman, Patrick CavanajghP —
iPyrsuing the even tenor of his way, m the
paths of honest industry, he is in the act of
fulfilling the decree of his Maker, he is earn-
•ing his bread by the sweat of his brow ; when
this villaip, less pure than the'arch- fiend who
-brought this sentence of laborious action on
mankind, enters the habitation of peace and
humble industry, and, not content with dipping
•his toneue in perjury and blood, robs the poor
man oftwo guineas! Can you winder that
he crept into the whole of the multitude when
the witness would have developed him? Do
you wonder that he endeavoureo to shun your
eyes?

At this moment even the bold and daring
villainy of O'Brien stood abashed; he saw the
eye of heaven in that of an innocent and in-
jured man ; perhaps the feeling;was consum-
mated by a glance from the dock— his heart
bore testimony to his guilt, and he fled for the
same ! Gracious God! have you been so spiled
in the vile intercourse, that you will give him
a degree of credit, which you will deny to the
candid and untainted evidence of so many ho-
nest men? But I have not done with him
yet — while an atom of his vilencss hangs to-
gether, I will separate it, lest you should
chance to be taken by it. Was there a human
ri'eature brought forward to say, he is any
PlUct than a vUlain? Did his counsel yen-

TrM 0f Patrick Finney

[1119

ture to ask our witnesses, why tfa^ discre-
dited him ? Did he dare to ask on what thejr
established their assertions? No! by thia
time it is probable Mr. O'Brien is sick of in-
vestigation. You find biro coiling himself in
the scaly circles of his cautious peijuiy, mak--
ing anticipated battle against any one who
should appear against him ; but you see him
sinking before the proof.

Do you feely gentlemen, that I hate beeq
wantonly aspersmg this roan's character f la
he not a perjurer, a swindler ? and that he is
not a murderer, will depend on you. He as-
sumes the character of a king's officer, to rob
the king's people of their money, and after-
wards, when their property tails him, ho
seeks to rob them of their lives ! What say
you to his habitual fellowship with baseness
and fraud ? He gives a recipe instracting to
felony, and counterfeiting the king's coin, and
when questioned about i1^ what is his answer I
why truly, that it was ^ only a hght easy way
of getting money ; only a little bit of a hum-
bug.'' Good God ! i ask you, has it ever
come across you to meet with such a constel-
lation of infamy !

Besides his perjury Clark had nothing to
say, scarcely eround to turn on. He swears
he was not in the court yesterday — what then?
why, he has only perjured himself! well* call
little skirmish up again P why, it was but a
mistake ! a little puzaled or so, and aot.lieiog
a lawyer, he could not tell whether he was
in court or not ! Mr. Clark is a moeh better
evidence than my lord Portarlington ; his
lordship, in the improvidence of Iruthy bore
a single testimony ; while Clark, wisely pro-
viding against contingeucieB, swore at both
sides of the gutter, but the lesser pe^urer is
almost forgotten in the mater. No fewer
than five perjuries are estaolished against the
loyal Mr. O'Brien, who has been <f united to
every honest man.*' If indicted on any one
ofthese, I must tell you, gentlemen, that he
could not be sworn in a court of justice; on
Ike testimony of five witnesses, on his own
testimony, he stands indicted before you ;
and gentlemen, you must refuse him that
credi^ which never ought to be squandered
on such baseness and profligacy. The present
cause takes in the entire character of your
country, which may sofier in the eyes of all
Europe by your verdict This is the first pro-
secution of the kind brought forward to view.
It is tlie great experiment of the informers
of Ireland, to ascertain how hx they can
carry on a traffic in human blood ! This can-
nibal informer, this dsmon, O'Brien, {[reedy
after human gore, has fifteen other victims
in reserve, if, from your verdict, he receives
the unhapnv man at the bar ! Fifteen more
of your teliow citiiens are to be tried on his
evidence 1 Be you then their saviours, let
your verdict snatch them from his ravenins
maw, and interpooe between yourselves and
endless remorse !

I know^ gentlemen^ I should but losiiU

1113}

for High TrmuoH.

A» D. 1798.

[1114

you, if I were to apologize for detaining you
tfhds iong ; if 1 have apology to make to any

Eeraon, it is to my client, for thus debtying
is acquittal . Sweet is the recollection of hav-
Hij^done justice, in that hour, when the hand
ofdeath presses on the human heart ! Hweet
18 the hope which it gives birth to ! From
you I demand that justice for my client, your
ronocent and unfortunate fallow subject at
the bar, and may you have for it a more last-
ing rewaid than the perishable crown we roid
of, which the ancients placed on the brow of
him, who saved in baltie, the life of a fellow
citizen.

If you should ever be assailed hj the hand
of the informer, mi^ you find an sJl-powerfol
refuge in the example which you shall set this
day ; earnestly do I |>ray, that you may never
experience what it is to count the tedious
hours in captivity, pining in the damps and
f loom of the dungeon, while the wicked one
IS going about at large, seeking whom he may
devour. There is an other than a human tri-
bunal, where the best of us will have occasion
to look back on the little good we have done.
In that awful trial, oh ! may your verdiet this
day assure your hopes, and give you strtogUi
and consolation in the presence of an Al>*
JUDGING GOD.

Rkplt.

Mr. SoUeiiar Genera/. — My Lords and Gen-
tlemen of the Jury :— I feel the responsibility
of the situation in which I am placed, when
I rise to address a few ubservations to you,
upon a caee of such magnitude and so pecu-
liarly circumstanced as the present; at the
inune time that I have in view the necessary
and important duty I am to dischai^e, I am
also anxious, and extremely so from a regard
to your lordship's health, exhausted as you
must be, not to lead you much farther mto
midnight, before your wise and learned charge
shall assist the jury, while they shall yet pos-
sess clear faculties and vigour of mind to dis-
cuss the body of evidence which they have
heard, and upon which they are bound to
decide.

• By the course which the counsel for the
prisoner have taken, I am much relieved, be-
cause it has been fiUrly acknowledged that if
the evidence which has been adduced is cre-
dible, there is no difficulty in point of law;
and they admit the evidence is competent to
convict, if the witnesses are such as you
ought to credit. Therefore, eentlemen, it is
not necessary for me now to labour that part
of the case, which if it rested on the statement
of the prisoner's case, might possibly have
involved some argument, smd perhaps some
difficulty, if it had been complicated by a dis-
cussion of those topics which were enlarged
upon by the counsel who stated the case of
the prisoner.

Gentlemen, whatever may be the event of
this case^ my first anxiety is for the due ad-
ministration of justice, and I do admit, that

unlets you Und yourselves impressed with
cogent and powerful conclusive impressions
fnim the evidence, you are bound to acquit
the prisoner; and it I were to inculcate a con-
trary opinion, or to enforce any other doctrine,
I should not be an advocate actuated by the
spirit of the British law, I should deprecate
that reverence which is due to a trial by jury,
and should be deemed unworthy of your at-
tention. Whatever the anxious wish of any
man hearing this case may be ; however great
his zeal for the acquittal of the prisoner, what-
ever his political sentiments may be, unless
be is reeardless of the public safety, he must
think, that the servants of the crown would
be unjustifiable, and that every principle of
active justice was abandoned, if this case had
not been brought forward. The charge against
the prisoner has not been hastily preferred.
however slowly it may have proceeded, and
been embarrassed by delay, and in the pro-
gress of the case it has appeared that every^
possible advantage has been taken by putting
ofithe trial, to traverse every comer of the
country to hunt for witnesses, to viKf^ the
characters of our witnesses, without being
able to combat the truth of those facts, which
if not well founded would have been easily
refuted, or the great body of evidence which
substantiates the charge with an unrefuted
consistency which is inseparable from truth,
and which, where circumstances are so nume-'
rous and so connected, cotdd never belong to
a fabricated tale.

Gentlemen, the charge is of a heavy kind ;
it imputes to the prisoner, the most enormous
guilt ; but this I am warranted to tell you,
that the prisoner having under the peculiar
advantage of this species of trial, been long
since furnished with a copy of the indictment,
has had every advantage of knowing every
overt act laid to bis charge, and of course has
had a long previous opportunity to prepare for
his defence, with an advantage peculiar in this
species of indictment, unknown in the law of
any other country but that of Britain, where
the benign eenius of the constitution affords
a ten-fold shield for the protection of the in-
nocent. behind which the abomination of
guUt has oftentimes taken shelter, and
triumphs in impunity.

I felt a pleasure at that part of the learned
gentleman's argument, whetv he spoke with
assumed rapturous expression, upon the laws
and constitution under which we live, when
contrasted with others that &lse popularity
had dared to applaud. But I must confess, I
f^lt regret at another part of the same gen-
tiemairs statement, where he drew an invi-
dious distinction, between the law of England,
and that of Ireland in regulating the trials for
high treason. It will not be thought foreign,
I trust, fW>m the duty I am discharging, to
rescue the minds of the jury from any seduc-
tion flowing from the arguments of that na-
ture, for I will be bold to say that I will satisfy
the mind of every man who hears me, nay

lUS] S8 GEORGE III.

even thai of Ibe prisooer, tbai the law under
which he is tried, and the conduct of the
Judgtf towards him» have afforded^ aod d(^
now afibrd him, the highest advantages that
have ever been extendra to any man standing
in similar circumstances^ in any quarter of
theglobe.

Gentlemen, the Uw upon which this indict-
ment has been framed, is the ancient and well
known statute, S5 Edw. 3rdt it never has;
b€«n changed from that day to this hour. It
has been truly said to be a harrier ag^nst
vague accusations, for it requires that a defi-
nite and specific charse descriptive of the
offence ana correspondent with the statute,
shall be set forth in the indictment, and such
diarge must be established upon proveable
grounds ; for, before it can anect the life of
any man indicted for compassins the death of
the l^ing, *ke muU be attainted ^open deed ^
men id'hU eanditionf and those deeds mu^ m
stated aod proved.

As to the difference between the laws sub-
sequently enacted in Great Britain and Ire*
laud, it has been said, that the prisoner was
not furnished with a copy of the panel, and of
the witnesses for the proseoution, two of whom
at least were indispensably aeoessary, by the
law of England, for the purpose of conviction.
The law which was alluded to as existing in
England* was a law enacted in the but cen-
tury under vei^ particular circumslanfes, upon
the history of which I do not desire too par-
ticularly to animadvert, with a view to cen«
sure those who in framing it, departed from
some of the first principles of the law of eti*
denoe, which is calculated for the purpose of
investigation and the ascertainment of truth.
The subject has been remarked upon by the
ablest judges who have eomroentea uponthe
Enelish law; under their opinion the law of
Irebadismore reooncUeable U> those iftva*-
riable rules which ought to govern aod prevail*
however convenient it nugbt have been Do
some active legislators, who had the framing
of the English statute, by a departure from
those rules to have embarrassed the trials
which were impending at that day, over the
heads of their nearest connexions. The great
crown wfilers who have existed since-^and
none of them were greater than sir Michael
Poster-^bave doubted the propriety of that
Eaglish statute, upon which he has animad*
verted with that becoming freedom and au*
tbority which probably operated upon the
wisdom of the legislature or Ireland, wbeo it
enacted our law in ibe laat rei){n. You must
he aware, gentlemen, that tho secret machi^
nations of treasoa are such as to render proof
ettremely difficult, and it is obvious, that it
eaa seldom be derived from any quarter, save
the penons employed, and participating ia
the designs; and We give me leave lo reoMrk,
that the taiuiting eipvession of inforaser,
which ymi have ao oflen beard from coimeely
with a view to put down all evidence derived
through the medittm oCsuch diKOvery, night

Tfwl qfFakkt Rmtey

[Hlfi

have been well spared. Tbo wiadait ef tha
law has not only received but decided npaa
such evidence from early times; the principle
becomes more approved bv daily eaperieoce;
but where the uaost horrid conspiraciea have
been formed under a bond of midnight ae«
crecy, where there is evidence unquesliQiied^
as in this case* that they have been acted
upon by thousaoda parading thiough your
atrqets» under tha pr^lenee of a fuoBral, the
evidence speaks trumpet-tongued to your con-
viction*.

It i4 said, this is the first trial vmq supb a
subjecL of late times, save one. If a gentle^
man of oven lets expefienee had said so, I
should wonder where be had lived, Tha
leamsd gentleman aUuded on^ la the wan-
derer, Jackf^Ui* aa he called him; has ha
forgot WeldoQ,t O'Connor,^ Hart, and others,
fur whom the learned aeotleflB»n has been
oouniel, aod wlio have been tried aod con-
victed of treason of the same kind, under the
same eoofedaratod syslemi wbidt has not
only been proved to exist, but to have raged
in outrage thaough the land.

Qenllemen, i have boon led into these oh*
aervations u|Hm the law and mode of trial,
and thoallusion to cases that have lately oc-
curred, in consequence of the observatioua
that fell from the counsel who last spoke ; he
has not only justified these observations, but
provoked ttern* and when aoor maa sbaU de-
predate and anaign that exoeHeat law by
which we live^ and by the obeervance of
which every social comfort is preserved^ I will
endeavour to rescue mv countryman from the
nuecbievQiua efiects of such a deception,-*-!
will reseoe the law and the aduunistiaiiDn o(
justiqe.in this coanlry from so unfounded
an imputation; beeauae I ut anxious that
the paaple shouki kaow thay aia entitled to
aod nmoy the piotection and bene^t of aa
wholeaoma laws aa the peopla of aiqr olbee
country in the uaivarae. It is fbr the pur*
pese of preserving to them these valuablo
rights* in despita m those who are caashioecl
to destroy them* that thib aodother triala have
been directed by those whose duty it is to pra«
vide for the puhlie aaf«iy» aod if they had aot
brought them forward they would bave inoaa
Juady been execrated and reviled k/ all good
men; th^ foal and are ooasoMMiaof the pain*
ful r^ponaibihty of their situations.

Oh, conditionem miseram non modb admi-
nistrandas veruro etiam conservands rei-
publics !

But, gantleaMa, I shall oome now to that
whidi is my more iimincdiale duty upon this
trial, aod I tmst, I shall address yon without

* See his case, mn^l^ vol. 96, p, 783.

t See the trials of |he.Defaoders» p* as^ of
this volume.

% He was tried« aod oonvkted of high trea-
son, at Naas on Tuesday Septembar Ut» U9^
but I hava nerei ma aoy rejpark af iba trial*

1117]

Jar High Tfdioiu

way other im)Nibe upon my mind, than ihM
which a MMfe of my duty exdtes. Tnie it is,
gentlemen, tb&t the principsl ]Hnt of the evi-
dence does rett u|>on the testimony of one
witness, (yBiien : Md true it is, he has Wen
strongly impeached in point of general eha-
racter; but I shall show yoii, b^ inferences
from the evidence of O'BrieB Mmself, and the
intrinsic nature imd Weight of H, and the oor*
roborating circimista&ces which are proved
beyond controversy, that it is impossible that
this can be a fabricated tale.

You already know that the principal overt
acts are laid m the indictment, of which the
prisoner has long since had a cop^ that has
enabled him to prepare for his defence.
What is the nature of the evidence? It com-
menced with facts, the earliest date of which
is the 45th of April last. A series of meet-
ings were had, many of them numerous, and
consisting of persons particularly named ; the
conduct of the prisoner at each of them was
described under such circumstances as might
be accounted for or contradicted, if the testi-
mony of the witness were not founded in fact;
for it appears most manifestly, not only fhom
the inaictment hut from the whole course of
the evidence, that the prisoner was awart
that the holding of those meetings and the
places where they were held, would be brought
m charge against him. For four or five suc-
cessive Sundays, the party met in numbers.
At an earlv stage of the business, and after
that O'Brien was made acquainted with the
conspiracy, and that it vras in process, the
witness goes— to whom f wh v, to such a man
as lord Portarlirigton, and he discloses not
only the confederacv, but the whole engage*
roent for acts to be none, and that are proved
and notoriously known to have been don^
since, such as the foneral procession and
other matters : if the witness had embarked
in a dark conspiracy against the prisoner's
life, was that the character he would have re-
sorted top Lord Portarlington has told you
that he came to him repeatedly, that he gave
fiim the previous intelltgence of what has
since happened. If he Were not conscious of
givlne useful and well grounded information,
would the witness have applied t6 a man of
such honour, worth and truth, as my lord
Porlariin^ton ? If he Was telling falsehoods
and a series of facts not likely to arise, to cor-
roborate hitn in evei^ stage, would he have
fon^told the meetings to be had, the places of
meeting in the midst of the metropolis, and
Other facts bo obviously the means of detect-
ing tlie falsehood of them If unfounded ? would
he have gone to such a man f and would lofd
Fortarlington have handed over the evidence
dnd witness to the execu^ve power if he con-
ceited'theip fulse f But it is said, lord Portar-
lioglon differs from O'Brien, for that'O'Brien
resprted to his lordship kt an eiriy period, and
disclosed then, as a fact, what' was not thought
of by the party, and did not happen till some
time afterwards ; namely, the intention and

A.D. 179B. [1118

flaxk to surprise the arsenal, which was a plan
resolved on some days afVer ; and this incoi^
aistency is relied on. But you will recollect,
that lord PorUurliogten could not be precise
as to the period of time when O'Brien men-
tioned the matter to him ; whether at his first,
aeoond, or tftnrd inlerview; and it cannot
escape observation, that as tlie places of meetw
iog were fkiinted out, and when to be held, ac-
cording to p««vious determination, that the
business to be transacted mifi;ht |»robably be
previously communicated to tne witness, who
appem lo have been placed ia a confidentiid
situation ; and as to the meetings havinr been
held accordingly, and the prisoner's navine
partaken in them as a leading character, and
as to his having been the most active person
in arranging that.funeral whkh was planned
at those meetings, and that procession whkh
terrified all Dublin by its numbers, and was
equally foretold, they stand upon the same
bottom, they were capable of equal disprocff
by multitudes, if not true ; but they stand not
only unrefuted but corroborated, so aa not to
leave a hinge to hang a doubt on: nor in
fiict, was tm inconsistency established by the
evidence. The witness, O'Brien, was only
permitted to state his having made ditelosurea
to lord Portarlington at difierent times, but
you remember, that as to the periods of time
when he conversed with lord Portilriington,
or tbe particular couvei^ation, the first wit-
ness, O^Brien, did not, nor would be permitted
to relate them ; because those conversations
were not in the presence of the prisoner, they
were not admissible evidence, and the witness
was not allowed to detail them fully. And
indeed, with regaid to this alleged witnt of ac^
eufacy in the periods of time which is endear
vodred to be collected from the^tesflimonv of
the witnesses^ it is to be observed, that loitl
Portarlington himself was not able to ascertain
in what particular period of time he heard on6
part of tne information, and in what period ho
neard another, and that he spbke in that re-
spect only upon belief. But the counsel for
tne prisoner did not venture to ask his loni«
ship, whether O'Brien told a consistent story.
He gave «n account of transactions which
passed in the presence of a number of persons,
with any 6ne of whom he mieht have been
confronted, if he were n6t faithful in the ac-
count he save this day. Nay, it was compe-
tei^t to tne counsel for the prisoner to ask
lord Portarlington, whether the witness ap«
peered to him to he consistent on the trial
with what he orieinally told, and whether he
had any doubt ot his veracity resting on his
mind ?— No, that was not done ; hor did lord
Portarlington of himself throw out any impu-
tation to shake the credit of the witness ; and
it was his lordship's dttty, if he felt any thin|
of that kind in his bosom, to have disclosed
It. I • have alluded -to the circumstances of
the funeral : the witness told lordTortarliiig-
ton, that on the then next Sunday there was
to be » funeral, at which 10,000 were to aU

1119J S6 GEORGE III.

tend, for the purpose of strikinglerror, and

Swing confident to traitors. It appears to
ave taken place ; it was planned by Finney,
from whom the witness received the notice;
it was arranged by him in the manner related
by the witness. It is notorious ; cannot the
prisoner call one roan in Dublin, or one man
of the 10,000 to disprove the active efibrts
with which he was charged on that occasion,
and that therefore the wittiess was not to
be believed upon his oath P Not a man is
produced, and therefore you must infer, that
what he has sworn is true. The witness goes
to meeting afler meeting ; he points out the
different liouses at which they are held ; he
details the overt acts which are stated in the
indictment, and which were planned at these
particular places; the waiters, the women,
and others belonsing to the nouses are all
stated and proved to have had knowledge of
the meetings, and that they wese all held
with mysterious secrecy, and no one ad*
mitted who had not the pass word; those
persons are not charged with the criminality,
and evei^ one of them is capable of being ad-
duced, examined, and of disproving what is
not true. But there is not one to disprove
the fact What more appears? the watch
words and pass words are given, and the party
is brought at last to the sign of St. Patrick, in
Meath-street, from whence the prisoner nar-
row! v escaped with the papers, on the alarm
of the magistrate's arriving; admittance is
found by the magistrate, by the pass word,
St. Patrick, as previously told by the witness,
the waiter and people belonging to the house
refusing admittence, until the pass word given
by the magistrate. The prisoner fled; he
carried off the papers ; he boasted of it the
next day to another witness, Clark ; but the
remaining part of the meeting, consisting of
the conspirators, previously named by the
witness, are taken in the very room from
whence the prisoner had fled. If it were an
innocent meeting — ^if theie were no conspiracy
— if no mischief were hatching, what need of
mystery^— why the necessity for being secret ?
---whv the wateh word, agreed upon as a
signal? but Finney, the prisoner, was not
found I why ? because, the witness told you,
he made his escape. If innocent, why did he
fly P If he did not fly and make his escape
with the books and papers, why not prove the
hicij and contradict the witness by tne waiter
and inhabitants of the house ? There are some
things above the power of observatkm, and
such is the not producing of these witnesses,
in their power.

Finney, the prisoner, is taken up the .next
day ; and some little merit is due to the coun-
sel for the crown, when having the informa-
tions of a deceased man, seijeant Thompson,
who has been since murdered, and whose, in-
formations might, under the late law, have
been given in evidence, to avoid all cavil of
objection they have not been pressed, we did
.not produce them. Therefore you are to put

Trial qfPairki Finney

tJisff

them altogether out of your miiida. But th«
gentlemen might have called for them* if thej
meant to refute Clark (the other soldier, who
was examined) as to the confession of Finney^
at which both were present Finney is steted
by Clark to have b«en in a tap room, at a

Sublic houscf, at Tuite's, upon the 31st of
lay, the day subsequent to his flight; and if
that were not the fact, it was capable of dis-
proof. It. does happen, however, that he
there boasted of his escape; after some other
conversation with the witness, in private, he
tenders an oCith, exactly soing toestablbh one
of the overt acts, that of becoming an United
Irishman, with an intention, of which no man
can now have a doubt, namely, to assist the
foreign enemy, when they should land, and
of giving them information, and to induce
them to come here. This will be considered
by you as strong evidence to support that part
of the indictment which charges the prisoner
with adhering to the enemies of the king.

What more appears? The prisoner gave
Clark the Constitution, containing the test of
the socie^, which has been read. I abstain
from commenting unnecessarily ufKm that
which may have been either on this or any
other occasion said in vindication of this no-
torious bond of conspiracy and treason. It is
foreign from my duty at present, by a waste of
time, to go into that discussion. But even if
it were as innocent upon the fiice of it, as the
first counsel for the prisoner argued it to be,
yet if it were intended and made use of for the
wicked purpose of involving the country in
ruin, desolation and blood, and of inviting
all the horrors of invasion, it is as criminal as
if the wicked design were expressed in the
very body of it, in characters of^blood. If the
confederacy charged i^nst the prisoner had
succeeded m their designs, and that excellent
and humane law which affords at this instant
so patient and fair a trial to the prisoner, were
overturned, the guillotine would have long
since superseded the cool investigation of a
junr,

I say then, gentlemen, if you are convinced
that this paper was used for such treasonable
and wicked purpoees, it will be evidence in
support of the indictment You cannot sup-
pose that such designs would be disclosed in
express terms ; guilt is more cautious in its
nature, ^cts apparently innocent in them-
selves may be explained by circumslances, be
evinced tobe of tqe most dangerous tendency.
Lord Preston took boat at Sgrrey stairs, an act
apparently innocent; but it appearing to tiave,
been done with an intention of goin^to France
to invite an invasion of England, it was <le-
termined to be an overt act of treason.

Gentlemen, I have now to combat some
observations which, have been made upoii the,
evidence, of .CUrIci He did undoubtedly say,
that he was not- in court yesterday, and U has
been observed^' that if be were, con virted oi
having said so falsely, he would, be rendere4
an incompetent witness; and therefore, it

llfl]

M

TVaoiaik

A.. IX 1799.

Cti9S

s^d, you ought to oongider hiin u co&vicisd
of penurjr.

I aaiBilytbal If be bas been guijty of wilful
and corrupt perjury, bis iestimooy ou|jbt to
be altoaetner r^ected :— that is an admissioa
full aoJ extensive enough for the gentlemen
concerned for the prisoner. But is it possible
to conceive, that tne man meant to be euilty
of wiliiil and corrupt perjury in conce^ng a
^t which was capable of firoof by an hun-
dred witnesses, all around him, in the very
court where we are now assembled, and iu
presence of the same persons who could con-
front him at the instant? Was it a ^t essen-
tial to the case, or could it in any degree
ai^t the witness or the case, let him answer
as be would ? — No deception could be meant
by it — ^it could therefore be only tlie misire-
collection of a moment. I leave it to your
judgment^could it be more? — He altended
many days of thb coinmlssion-«-he was absent
upon others; nothing was so natural as to
have confounded his recollection as to both.
I rely upon it that his general veracity is not
impeached, and that be has corroborated the
other witness in the most important part of
his evidence. Finnev boasts of hcs escape,
and tlioso concerned for him not bringing
forward evidence to disprove that account is
strons to show you that it is incapable of dis-
proo(--I do allow that O'Brien has been im-
peached in general character— but with regard
to what ? Certainly not as to one substantial
feative of this caae-^^d who are the wit-
neseea to imneach his character, or to ewear
to collatecaf facts which he has denied?—-
Why,, they are ^1 of them persons with whom
he has been at variance, and who n^y well be
considered to be actuated by resentment
Gentkmea complain that they wer^ not pre-
pared as they might to impeach O'Brien, not
knowing he was to be the witness, and yet by
means of putting off the trial from week to
week, they have had leisure to ransack the
country, and every part of it where he has
lived for a day ; they have hunted through
every village SLiid fitmily wh^re he has ever
been, not an alehouse has been left un-
aoarched, and not « gossiping old woman with
whom he has had an anti(}uated and stale
gallantry, that has not beeo resorted to, and
brought forward as a witness to afiect bis
credit; showing to demonstration^ that they
were apprized, and that too for a length of
tiose, tnat he was to appear ag^st tM pri-
sonerasa principal witness upon the trial
But it is observable, that Gray ^nd Roberts
wove swoitt to be material witnesses for the
prisoner,, and the counsel have not dajred to
esamioe theon when they found they attended.
Then, gentlemen^ ask yourselves, were ihnt
indifiercnt witnesses, uninfluenced by pr^^
dice or passion ? Do you not see, that tbey
are every one inflamed and hurried on by
resentment?

Geoilemeny ad ta the charge of coinings I
abitU npt say ona wend uptOA it. Though

VOL. XXVI,

much Strega was laid upon it by the g^Ue*

mf n of the other side^ it seemed to me to bo
an idle and ridiculoussort of jesting unworthy^
of vour attention. This then is the great
body of evidence on which vou are to deli*
berate and decide, an<l I would rather direct
your thoughts to one great comprehensive
view of it, than to fritter away your attentioa
by too minute observations, that might weaiy
and distract.

One thing however I roust again take
notice of, that in the essential features of the
case, and of O'Brieo's evidence, not a particle
of evidence baa been brought forward to con<*
trovert it, and he has been corroborated by
Clark, Atkinson, and lord Portarlington in
most branches of it, and the intrinsic weight
of the evidence itself, has been beyond tne
attempt of the advocate to combat with^
thougn be has with his usual addijBss at-
tacked the witnesses character In every vul^
nerable point. Gentlemen, we can not expect
the best moral characters amongst conspnu-
tors, even thougb they have virtue enougU
left to revolt from their treason ; but when a
man discloses and confesses his own guilt, he
has gained one step towards your belief.
But, sentlemen, such a tal^ as this no maa
could nave had the boldness to fabricate, and
if he had, the variety of cixcumstaAces, the
variety of pkioes, times and persons, of which
it is made up, must have rendered it so vul»
nerable were it false, that. the finger of doteo*
tion would have exposed its nakedness, and
smote it to the earth in the course of so long
a trial.

Gentlemen^ this is a case of great iraport-r
ance, and I am sure you will do your duty io»
yourselves, to your .God, and to your country*
We must endeswour to restore the people of
the land to their fbvmer comforts in ufe. Gor*
vernment bad been much to blame, if thia
prosocutioa had not been brought forward^
out let the consequences be what they may,
you are seriously to consider thci evidence* If
you have well welshed the eividence, it will
carry its just weight with it, and if you find
that there are stilfdoubts remaining unsatis-
fied in your-minds, which prevent your feel-*
injg a just, a fa^r, and a reasonable conviction
oft the prisoner, what I urce will have no
avail, and the Court will telfyou your duty.

Summing up.

Mr. Justice Qhamberlmn. — Gentlemen of
the Jury ; The crime charged against the prt*
sooer is high-treason — a crime of the most
atrocioua nature, and wlien it is to be effected
by the inlroductioo of a powerful foreign
enemyt t& an attempt to overthrow, the rightSi
and liberty of every individual in the com-
munity, and to cbvec the land with blood and
devastation. Bu^ in proportion as tlie crime
is enormous (as haa been properly suied by
Hr. M<Nally)» and aaeach individual maytm
affected by it, so tlioso who are to sit ia
judgment upon tbe ilKt, are to walch them*

4C

1 Its] S8 GEORGE IIL

seUei, and b« most cautious^— more than in
any other ca»ey»that the accusation be
proved.

The statute which has been mentioned,;
95 Edw. Srd, I admit i^ in several respects a
declaratory act, as the prisoners counsel
have ar^ed ; it was made for the purpose of
preventmg men from being entrapped by
general ciiarges of high-treason: doloiui
veriatur in generaiibus^ and therefore that
act expressly specified and ascertained, what
was to be deemed treason; — and it went
farther, and ordered that the overt act, which
I imderstand to be the means of executing
the treason, should be plainly set forth, that
the person accused should know fully what
he is to defend himself against. — And it or*
dained, that these overt acts shall hepraoe'
Mbh or satisfactorily made out in evidence.

Gentlemen, the prisoner at the bar is in-
dicted for two species of treasons, as ascer-
tained by the statute ; — one is, compassing
and imagining the death of the king; the
other is, adhering to the king*s enemies.

With regard to the charee of compassing
and imaeinmg the death of Uie king, it is de-
termined, that any act, which directly or in-
directly brings the life of the king into dan-
ger, is withm this branch of the statute; as
to dethrone, or imprison him. So to invite
foreigners to invade the county is considered
as a probable mean of bringing the king^s
Hfe into danger. — Adhering to the king's
enemies is also expounded to be an overt act
of the same species, and justly so, because
the probable consequence may be, that he,
whose duty it is to resist the enemy, may fall
mto their hands, the natural consequence of
which would be his death.

But suppose the first count in the indrct-
raent haa been omitted, we are of opinion,
that the justice of this case does not require
that you should go farther than considering
the charge of adhering to the. king's enemies;
that offence is intelligible by every man of
plain reason. It consists in doing any act to
promote their interests, and with that intent,
no matter whether the attempt is aborUve or
not—Lord Preston's case has been skated at
the bar; — he was indicted for high-treason,
and it appeared he had formed a plan to
invite the French to invade England ; — that
he had embarked for France with that plan in
his possession : he was taken on the river
Thames, and bis attempt to go to France,
and lay his plan before the French govern-
ment,^ though prevented, was held to be an
adhering to the king's en6mies. That case
was decided by lord Holu one of the matest
judges who presided in Westminster-hall.

In the qase of Dr. Hensey, nearer our own
days, the same doctrine was recognized. He
was tried b;^ Lord Mansfield, one of the
greatest luminaries of the law assisted by
some of the ablest judges;— Hensev wrote a
letter intended for the enemies of the king,
aad though tl was intercept(^ in its progress,

Trial ofPiairkk Finney

[11S4

it was considered an adherblg to the king's
enemies.

So in the case of Jackson, who was lately
tried in this country, there was the same de-
termination. He drew up a paper, purportinjg
to be a state of this kingdom, and caused it
to be put into the post-office, for the purpose
of forwarding it to France ; it was intercepted
in the post-office, and the Court of King's
Bench unanimously determined, tliat the
statement so drawn up and put into the post
office, with the intent of its oeing forwarded
to the French, then at war with us, though
intercepted, was an act of adhermg to the
king's enemies.

And, gentlemen, it is plain sense and good
policy, that the law should be so ; for the act
of the party is complete, and if we were to
wait for the event, it might be idle to talk of
punishment — because the attempt might be
attended with success, and you might be ren^
dered unable to decide upon the case.

As to the indictment, there are many overt
acts laid, but it would only perplex, minutely
to state each of them. In our opinion, those
part4 of the indictment which state the deli-
Derations had to send persons into France, at
a future day, are not established ; and upon
this ground, we conceive, that the third,
fburth, fiflh and sixth overt acts are not
proved. But as to the others, you are to con-
sider the evidence.

The first overt act is, that the prisoner did"
associate himself with other false traitors,
under the denomination of United Irishmen,
with design and for the end (which you will
all along consider as of the essence of the
case) of adhering to the persons exercising
the powers of government in France. The
second overt act is the same as the first in
different words. There is another, stating an
attempt to seize upon the ordnance stores.
Another, that the prisoner and others, to the
amount of 48 in the whole, divided themselves
into splits; all the subsequent overt acts,
showing the proceedings and designs of that
society, named in the first overt act laid in
the inilictmeDt.

Gentlemen, in support of this indictment,
James O'Brien has been produced ; but t>efore
I state a tittle of his evklence, I must give
you this caution, namely, that if you shall be
of opinion, that he has wilfully and delibe-
rately perjured himself, even as to a collaterml
fiict, upon this trial, you are to reject his tes-
timony, unless you find, that it has been so
corroliorated by circumstances, or other un«
impeached evidence, as to be irresistible.
You are to ask this question— Whether, if he
were indicted before you for wilful and cor-
rupt perjury in answer to any question asked
him this |day, you would convict him f-^And
if you are of opinion, that you would convict
him, you ought not, in my opinion, to convict
the prisoner upon his unsupported testimony.
And however Mrongly yon nay suspect the
prisoner, yet it were better that one Imnlred

1195J

fsr High Treason.

K D. 1798.

[1126

guiliy penons thoold McafM^ than ro«ke a
precedent by which one.inaoceni man nittbt
De found euiltj upon such iesUroony. The
evidence oT a witness who perjures himself
wilfully, even as to a collateral fact, is to be
segarded still less than that of an approver,
who makes a candid and clear confession of
every fact in the hearing of a jury; such a
recital may claim credit. But if a man, in
anv one instance upon a trial, shall commit
wilful and corrupt periury, I should be glad
to know, whether it wiA not cast a doubt upon
hb evidence as to the main fact, which henas
been brought to prove? — And if there be a
doubt, I take it to be a clear maxim, founded
in humanity as well as law, that you must
acquit the prisoner. For in that case the
impression made upon your minds can at
most create a strone suspicion of the pri-
soner's guilt; but that is not sufficient to
convict nim.

Gentlemen, having stated this caution, I
shall repeat to you, what this witness swore
[Here his lordship recapitulated the evidence,
and observed upon the oath of the United
Irishmen to the following effect] : — ^To call
upon all the people in the manner this obli-
gation endeavours to do, is of a most alarming
nature; upon the hce of it, it is a felony to
administer or to take such an oath, and it is
absurd to suppose that any rational creature
can think it brnding.— Suppose a man swore
be would not pay hb dents, is he not still
bound by the legal, as well as the moral obli-
gation to pay uem. — Suppose he swore to
commit penury, shall he be bound by such
an oath r Though a man be sworn to commit
murder, b be not bound to abstain from com-
mitting such a crime ? — ^The United Irishman
is sworn not to ghre evidence against a bro-
ther ; — but the law says, that when produced
as a witness, he shall swear to disclose the
truth.— So that an United Irishman^ when he
enters into the assocbtion, binds himself by
the solemnity of an oath to commit perjury.

[Afler recapitulating the evidence and re-
marking upon the oath, his lordship pro-
ceeded : — ]

As to the credit due to O'Brien, it is mate-
rial to observe, that Mr. Higsins is not pro-
duced, though it was to hioine gave the first
information. The witness said, he was told
of the funeral upon Sundav the SOth of April,
and yet he had' mentionea it upon the S8th,
two days before, when giving information.
But the transaction took place, and he tould
hflffdly prophecy such a matter ;^it is possible
it mignt nave been communicated to him
some oth€x way, before the Sundav; so that
this does not appear much to affect bis credit.

Itwasmuchreliedupon, that the number
of conspirators were represented as 111,000,
wad that if O'Brien shall gain credit, that
number must be involved in the guilt of the ^
prisoner. But you are to judge, whether it
may aot be very likely the number was so

misrepresented, and if the prisoner was en-
gaged in mbleading others, whether it was
not natural he should e&ag^rate the numbers,
in order to encourage and invite those, whom
he was anxious to seduce.

At the meeting at TXiite's, there was a con*
sultation and directions were given to ezamtoe
certain places, with a view to attack the
Ordnance ;— >tbis goes to one of the overt acts,
if you believe the intention to have been as
laid in the indictment For if it were only
for the sake of plunder, it b not evidence of
treason.

Yqu are told money was collected for per-
sons sent into France, in order to inform the
government there, that great numbers were
ready to assist them, if they should invade
this kingdom. Thb evidence, if believed,
shows most explicitly this societv to be traitore
— that United Irbhmen, and all others joining
them, knowing their intent, are an associa-
tion formed for the abominable purpose of
supporting the enemies of this countiy.

In weignins the credit of O'Brien, you are
to reflect, gentlemen, that thb has been a long
trial, and there has been abundant time to
send for any of tbepersonslceeping the houses
in Meath-street and other places, mcntiooed
by the witness 0*Brien, and to produce any
one of them, their families or waiters, to
show that the prisoner was not there. No
attempt, however, has been made to produce
any of them. Upon the cross-examination,
O'Brien said he came from the Castle— whe-
ther he was there for protection, you are to
judge; — and whether it may not be presumed
that he was.

As to the credit which you are to give to
O'Brien, it is also observable, eentlemen, that
neither Mr. Cooke nor colond Henniker has
been produced :— -Undoubtedly, it might have
had weight to show, that thb man went to
some person of consideration, apprbed him
of eveiy meeting as it was held, and commu-
nicated the transactions which passed, in the
same manner as he had stated them in his
evidence ; for this purpose, indeed, lord Port-
arlineton has been produced. But it is ob-
servable that he thinks O'Brien disclosed the
intention of an attack upon the Ordnance in
his lordship's first interview with O'Brien, viz.
in the Utter end of last April, whereas O'Brien
has sworn that scheme to have been formed
on the 7 th of May. As to the precise time,
however, of O'Bnen's communicating this to
him, lord Portarlington was not positive ;-•«>
but he declared, that this communication had
been made him in the presence of Mr. Secre-
tary Cooke in the chamber of the Speaker, at
the House of Commons. And yet Mr. Secre*
tary Cooke, from whom you might expect ac-
curacy, ana who from the nature of his office,
you might expect would have committed to
writing whatever was disclosed to him, upon
a subject so important to the nation as this,
has not been produced — why, it is not for me
to say ;— but undoubtedly this emission leaves

1197] 38 GEORGE HI.

aooo&imott^ if not mi idooasitieii^ and re*
puj^nanoe betwven the evidence ef lord Porl-
erluigtoa and O'fiiieB.

The AuoilitMtion of the U'u'md Iriahmen
has been read; so far as H goes, h corrobo-
notes the testinbny of O'Brien ; fn he stated
the oath ahnoet Iketatim the same t*-indeed,
yon are to.consider, whether U is net some-
wiiat extmordinaiy he feheidd remember it so
eiacilj; for he stated vpon his recollection
the very words which are io the paper.

Giaiky who was produced to support him,
swore he was not in court yesterday, and
when produced a second time, said he swore
in mistake ;-^t is not Jikely, that a oonsi*
derate man would commit such an error;—
but if you are o€ opinion, that he was really
mistaken, that circumstance alene otight not
to affect his credit.

To impeach the credit of 0*Brien, added to
the circumstances disclosed by himself upon
his cross-examination, the prisoner's counsel
have relied upon the evidence of several wit-
nesses produced Io contradict him in certain
particulars, to which he has sworn. He was
asked, whether he had ever pretended to be
an excise^fficer^ and yea will recollect his
mode of answenng— wz : — He never did to
when iober^ he vme «f ene time fond of drinkf
and could n§t scy what pmteed when he wa$
drunk. You, gentlemen, will judge, whether
thb was an in^nuous disclosure of the truth,
according to his oath, or an artful contrivance
to guara aeainftt the consequence of beine
contradicted^ if he swore falsely; and you wHl
wetth agyunst Ihie swearing of O'Brien, the
evidence of three unimpeacbed wimesseS pro*
duced by the prisoner— John Clarke, Patrick
Cavaaagh and George Howell— Clarke has
told you, that four days successively O'Brien
irent to his house, the Blue Bell, in the cha-
racter of a revenue-officer, and that he de-
clared he was such, and threatened to sue
him for selling liouor without licence ;— and
Gavanagh and Howell have given you other
remarkable InsUnces of O'Brien's having
practised similar impositions upon each ot
tfaem^-so that O'Brien in this respect is con-
tradicted by three concurring witnesses, and
you will see from other circumstances on
which side the probability ]i€S. FromCBrien's
own account he has been guilty of several aets
of extortion. He admits, that he has been in
aeveral instances a cheat, and having given
bis friend £dward PurceTI a recipe for cmour-
ing copper, as silver, and at the same time a
counterfeit hatf^own. He never tried that
FMtpe himself; hat he has «een other recipes
.tried for that purpose. He has not thought
#t however to ad^it hlnMMflf a coiner :— that
i» too flagrant-att^offencet-^hegtive this re-
cipe «nd hatr-iDr6Wn to Pnro^ll merely as a
joke or humbug; as he expressed MmMlf.

WiUiam Dunn, who firfts known this man
lirom his childhood, swears that he does not
vieserre credit upon his oath, even in a matter

TfU rfPaltrkk Tiimey

C1H8

indeed, that no man in the coMmaoity liaa
ooDtradieted Dunn in this respect, vit in any
manner vooebed the character ti Q^BrieU,
altlMN^ it has been ^impeached. Ontber
contrSiy,eee wliether diie testimony given
by Dunn islMt'stranrfy eoiiDbol^tea by fiie
account given by<Tllnai«f taimeelf, in ^rhieli
as I have meatkmed, he admits himself to
have been a tommon cheat, and that he gave
his friend a reoipe for awmttrfeiting the silver
coin of the kingdom— that he has seen recipes
tried for the like purpose, but denies that he
himself has been a ecttier^n which he de-
nies that he ever pretended to be an excise*
officer, when sober; but in wiikrh be is con-
tradicted by three unimpeadbed wttnesses.*-^
You, gentlemen, are to consider all these cir^
cumstances, and if you believe, that 0*Brien
has wilfully perjured himself in any matter
to which he has sworn upon this triad, I think
you ought to reject his evidence altogether:
If he were convicted of this perjury. He could
not open his lips— if indeed you give credit to
Peter Clark (who is not free from objection
either) I feel, tliat O^firien's testimony )iaa
been in some partcorroborated-^I tnean as to
the prisoner's being an United Irishman, and
having administered that abominable oattiy
for doing whidi he might be convicted for m
felony upon another form of indictment But
as to the prisoner's treasonable intenjl, wfdch
is the subject of your enqniry, that I conskler
as depending entirely and singly upon the
evidence of O'Brien, who akme has related
to yen the meetings, the acts, the proceed-
ings and the declarations of the prisoner
and his associates. And if you believe that
he has wilfully perjured himself in any pvt
of his testimony, I think you onght to ac^it,
for it would be a bold experiment for a jury
to tiy to sift this man's eviaence, and to endear
vour to separate the truth from the falsehood ;
and to rest a conviction, io acase aflecting life,
upon the single testimony of soch a man as
O'Brien is proved to be, not only by others^
but by himself.

These are the observation^, that bave oc«»
cufredto me; but jfou will have the advall^M
of hearing the sentiments of Mr. Baron Smith
upon tliis case, which is certainly of the ut-
most importance to the pris<mer and the
public.

Mr. Baron Sndth [afterwards Master of the
Rolh}. Gentlemen of the Jury; I. do not
know that I ought to trouble you with a sinele
ob$ervation. Every observation which me
law, or justice of mis caiie could require or
warrtkiit, has already beeh tery folly' and tery
ably made dt my brother ChamtMAun. ^ And
therefore exiiaustetl as I am, and as I am
sure you must be^ I shall add but Httle.

It fias been sard, atfd said truly, that the
offonce charged against the prisoner is one oT
the most atrocious nature. Bdt it has beeti
said, and with eqtfal tmth^ that the more
atrocious the diarge, tfafe hsi ptobabkiatbt

ilSffI

far High Treasim*

A. D. 1798.

CI ISO

euilt t>f the |niaaner. The humntiirf of our
law declares that in ofl^ces of the lowest
kind, hinocence shall be presumed, untU guih
i^hall be established by full and sufficient eri-
dence. And if such be the rule in offences of
the lowest kind, how much more strongly
will it apply in cases of such an enormous na-
ture as the present?— Sad experience has in-
deed shown, that however heinous and im-
probable a charge may be, it is but too oQen
susluned by proof: yet juries should take
special care, that the proof in such cases be
rail and satisfactory. You have been told^
thattmderaa act of parliament, frequently
alluded to in the course of this trial, persons
indicted of treason shall not be convicted, ex-
cept opon proveahU evidence. But, gentle-
men, tnoush that act never had been made,
vou would draw the rule from your own
hearts, and you would sav, you never would
find a fdlow-creature guilty of an offence for
which.his life must be forfeited, except upon
evidence fiill and complete !n your mindsy
and such as ousht to satisfy your consciences.

Gentlemen. It was admitted, and in my
opinion wisely admitted hj the counsel for
the prisoner, that if the evidence which you
have heard were credible, it would support
the indictment. And certainly if that evi-
dence be such as you shall deem sufficiently
deserving of credit, it will, in point of law,
support the indictment; for I think the ma-
ionty of the overt acts (and one alone would
be suffident) have been proved, if the evidence
deserves credit. And, gentlemen, even if the
testimony of two witnesses were necessary,
tipon which I do not think myself called upon
to give any opinion at juresent, two witnesses
have nven evidence of an overt act A#re, that
is, of the prisoner'*s having become a member
of the United Irishmen ip order to assist the
kim^enemies. If, the^-efore, the evidence
of &&rien and Clark be such, as vou think
ym ought to give credit to, it will, in my
mind, te sufficient to sustain the indictment
and support a verdict of conviction.

Dot, gentlemen, the great question is, whe-
ther tlie evidence which you have heard this
day can be considered as proof or not? whe-
ther it be such as woukl justify you in finding
the pTisoner goilly f — I aotonl^thixik as Mr.
Justice Chamoeriaio does, that if you were sit-
ting to determine, whether Clark and O^rten
in tne testimony they gave this day,were guiltv
of wilful and corrupt perjury or not; atid if
yon should be of opmion that thev were, you
ought CO acquit the prisoner at the bar; hut
I will go farther, and say, if you have a douH
upon that question^if your minds be in a
state of balaoce, yofo ought in that case tQ
acquit the prisoner, because to justify a ver-
dia of conviction to yourselves and to your
country, the evidence upon whkh you decide
ahould be above exception, and not evideUce
upon which you enteitain any doubt.

The testimony of D'firlenU the mo9t mate-
rial b this case. Lord Portarfington has been

produced to confirm him. Their teslimont
has been compared. Lord Portarlington sari,
that O'Brien came to him the latter end of
Aprils—O'Brien ascertained it to be upon the
98th, that he informed his lotdtfhip he had
entered into a society of United Irishmen —
that there was to be a funeral attended by
10,000 men— but he understood it was to be
a sham funeral, for the man had been buried
before. His lordship was positive this con-
versation passed at the first interview. He
stated also, that O'Brien informed him of the
meditated attack upon the Ordnance stores in
the Castle. Lord Portarlington said, he could
not be certahk whether that had been men-
tioned in the nrst interview with O'Brien, or
not. But he did sav in the course of his tes-
timony, that he did not recollect any thing
material to have been mentioned at a^y inter-
view subsequent to the first. It appears, that
the funeral did take place, and it was atCqgh-
ran's that the witness received hb directions
to go to the funeral. The impression upon
my mind was, that the witness had not till
that evening heard any thing of that fimen).
What tivk impression upon your minds is, you
are to determine. However, I feel it mv mity
to say, that I do not think It impossible to
reconcile the testimony in this respect; be-
cause it appeared, that Uie witness had been in
close intimacy with Hviand, and others of ther
fraternity for some days; and therefore it
might weU happen that in the course of those
days he had heard of the funeral intended to

at some former day.

However, lord Portarliqgton fiulher told you
of the meditated attack upon the Ordnance,
and he certainly did say, that though he
could not be positive that the communica-
tion of that circumstance was made tt the
first interview, yet he said, he did not think
any thing material was mentioned, upon the
second. From O'Brien's testimony It ap-
pears, that he did not hear aif the intended
attacK upon the Ordnance until the 7th of
May, when it was motioned for the first
time at the Sheaf of Wheat Therefore it
seems most extraordinary indeed, that he
should upon the 38th of April mention a fac^
which, according to his own testimony, he
knew nothing of until the 7th of May. If
then, you suppose he communicated at the
first interview this meditated attack upon the
Ordnance, it will fbUow, that he must have
known of it before the 98th of April, and
therefore his assertion, that his first know-
ledge of ft was upon the 7th of May is not
founded iu fact.— And at all events, thefe is
a cloud fiung over the testimony of O^Brien
by lord Portarlineton, which renders it strange
and unaccountable indeed, that those persons
whose te^mony might have removed that
cloud and have satisfied your minds, have
not been cidled { namely, Mr. Higgins, colonel

1131] S8 GEORGE Ul.

Henniker^ and Mr. Cooky by whom- tb« wit-
ness was examined in ^he committee room of
the Parliament Houscy neither has major Sirr
been produced.

. Clark, the corporal, was indeed produced
to corroborate O'Brien s testimony, and in my
apprehension, if he deserves credit, be has
gone a very great way to corroborate O^Brien.
Clark said, be was sworn by the prisoner to
the test oath; that he heard the prisoner brag,
that he had upon the night when the sixteen
men were apprehended, effected his escape by
being taken for an officer. So that if you
believe Clark's testimony deserving of credit,
it will go a gi^at way to sustain that of O'Brien.
However, Clark did say, that be was not in
court yesterday ; aAerwards he did say, that
that was a mistake, that he was puzzled and
did not understand law. But according to
my notes, and as I best recollect, when he
vras asked, where he went to from tljis, he
said, to Ormondquay : and on the counsel's
asking him—** What! from this?" be an-
swered " No, not from Mi«, but from the out'
ude of the Court' houte,** an answer which
seemed to me to have been deliberately given,
4ind on recollection, and^ not the result of
embarrassment or mere mistake, as he wished
to represent it; and if this either satisfies you
that he meant to commit penury, or excites a
doubt in your minds as to that fact, it t^es
away so much from the credit of his testi-
mony, as to make it extremely hazardous in-
deed to build a conviction upon it.
, Gentlemen, on the part of the prisoner five
witnesses have been examined. I shall iust
touch upon the most material points of their
testimony. O'Brien positively denied, that
he ever said he was a revenue officer : be re-
peated it a£ain and agaitk saying however,
that he could not account for what he might
have said, when he was drunk. John Clarke
swore, that O'Brien expresslv stated himself
to be a revenue officer, and that he was sober
when he made that declaration. Cavanagh
swore, he said he was a revenue officer, and
that Fitzpatrick had been removed. Howell,
Mr. Wilson's clerk, swore the same thing,
a6d that being charged with the falsehood,
he went off, and did not make his appearance
again.

Here then are three witnesses, of whose
credit you are to judge, all swearing that
O'Brien, when sober, said he was a revenue
officer; thereby directly contradicting what
O'Brien himself had sworn as to that fact.
As to his character you had a witness who
swore that he knew O'Brien from bis child-
hood, and that be would not believe him
upon his oath : an account has also been given
or his conduct, to show that he is a man of
improper manners, and of profligate charac-
ter, which, though not sufficient of itself to
overthrow his credit, yet united with the
other circumstances ^ven in evidence, ought
cerUinly to have weight It is possible, no
doubt, that a man ofa profligaU disposition

Trial qfPaMd$ Finney

[1132

may tcU truth ; but such a dispositk>i| will
deserye the consideration of a jury, when
about to determine upon the evidence of such
a man.

And afler his general character and partici^
lar conduct in life, have been thus impeached,
does not the observation which was made
before recur with double force, that, it is
strange and unaccountable, that not one of
the persons to whom he appealed, as it were,
for the truth of his testimony, has been pro-
duced, or a single individual in the commu-
nity brought forward to sustain his cha-
racter^ or shield it from the imputationa cast
upon It?

On the whole, gentlemen, you are the sole
judges of the credit due to witnesses. If you
are of opinion, that O'Brien and Clark de-
serve ^Qur credit; that their testimony u un-
eiceptionable, and unimpeached, I do think
that, in point of law, it Is sufficient to sustain
the indictment.

But I repeat, that you ought to be sa-
tisfied beyond, all possibility of doubt, that
the testimony which you have heard is true,
and unquestionable as to the &cts it stated,
before you .ground a verdict of convic.tion
upon it

The jurv retired for a ouarter of an hour,
and brought in a verdict^Vor Guii.tt.

In consequence of tbe late sitting on the
trial of Finney, the Court did not sit on
Wednesday the 17th.

On Thurday, the 18th, at the sitting of the
Court, Mr. Attorney General rose and ad-
dressed the Court :

My lords ; On the last day of the sitting of
this Court, Patrick Finney was tried for high
treason ; the char^ against him was founded
on examinations m themselves so strong, so
dear and consistent, and confirmed by so
many collateral circumstances, that any ma-
gistrate who should omit to bring him for-
ward, or any prosecutor who should omit to
proceed against him, would be guilty of a de-
reliction of that duty which he owed to his
country; from the time of his arrest, it has
been the constant endeavour of the officers
of the crown to bring blm to trial as speedily
as possible, and that endeavour has been
opposed only bv the prisoner himself; on his
part the trial has been repeatedly deferred,
and once on the day of his trial, he attemntea
farther delay without success; the lenrth of
confinement therefore cannot be compmined
of as a {;rievance either by ihim, or those
involved in the same charge ; on the trial, the
evidence for the prosecution appeared as full,
as circumstantial, as consistent, and satisfac-
tory as could have been expected, and it was
onlv by a long examination into the past life
and character of the principal witness, and by
resorting to persons and modes of^nfbfinar
tion to which the prosecutors could hava no
access, that it appeared that np credit ought

§

IISS]

Jh(r High Treason.

A. I>. 1798.

[1134

to be ehren to the testimony of that witness;
that he is not to be believed is now estab*
lished by ajur; of the country; under these
circumstances it would be indecorous in the
counsel for the crown, and inoonsistent with
the principles on which a prosecutor ought to
acty to proceed against the other prisoners,
accused by the same witness. I therefore
humbly move that they be now brought up
and discharged in the usual way from the in-
dictments against them, submitting it how-
ever to the Court, that imder the circum-
stances of the case, they ought to be obliged
tv give security for their sood behaviour.

Mr. M*Nmify,^My loids, my duty as coun*
sel for Finney being now closed, I rise to
bear testimony to the statement of the attor-
ney-general, and to declare that the conduct
of the prosecution has in every respect been
aa candid and humane as possible, and that
the man accused has nothing to complun of
from the day of his arrest to this hour ; his
trial has been deferred by himself in evety
instance but one, and then it was done by the
Court on the urgency of circumstances.

Mr. Justice Chamberlain.'^l think Mr.
M^Nally's declaration has done him the
highest honour, and I do add, that no defisnce
could have been more correctly or My con*
ducted. 1 entirely subscribe to wfaAt has been
said on both sides; it is clear from all the
eiitumstances, that there never was a case
more lit to be brought to trial, and to be laid
before the public in all its parts, and I believe
that the impression on the minds ef the
hearers was the same as on mine, that the
life of the prisoner was in the utmost danger,
until his defence was fully gone into, and the
life and character of the witness, O'Brien,
were fully developed, so as that it appeared to
the jury, m which I entirely concur with them,
that he ought not to obtain credit on his oath
io a court of justice. The conduct of the
prosecutor is precisely what it should be, to
firing forward the charge, when it appeared
to be well founded, and to relinquish it
now, when that foundation appeared to be
unsound.

Mr. Baron Smilit.— I believe we all thought
the storqr of O'Brien true, methodically re-
lated as It was, until we heard the prisoner's
defence; and I entirely concur in every thing
that my brother Chamberlain has said— I
have only to add, that the counsel for the
prisoner conducted themselves in his defence
sot onlv with the sreatest ability and pro-
^ety, but also with a proper attention to
those paramount duties wnicn counsel ought
never to forget in the exercise of their pro-

The other persons accused of high treason
were then brought up, and Jiaving joined in
their challenges, were committed Io thejurv
together, and no witness being produced,
were of course aequitted; th^ were then ad-
dressed as follows by

Jlr. Justice CA<»i6fr/eiii,--Prisonei8y you

have now been acquitted of the crime with
which vou were charged ; but I expect that
yoii will give security for your good behaviour,
and also testify your allegiance to the Icing,
by your oath in open court. You are acquit*
ted of the charge of treason; but it appears
from unquestionsble testimony, wholly indo-
pendent of 0*Brien*s evidence, that you are
by no means free from blaiAe ; you were a»-
sembled in an unusual number, for some pur-
pose which you have not dared to explain,
and which you were conscious required se-
crecy, as appears by the centinels pasted to
guard your meeting, and the watch word for
admission into it ; what the purpose of that
meeting was^ however, I am now ignorant ;
if you were of that base and abominable so-
ciety, called United Irishmen, I expect you to
withdraw from so foul a conspiracy ; if you
have entered into it, the oath you must have
taken might have warned you of the baseness
of their purposes; it begins, I admit, plausi-
bly; to form a brotherly union amongst all
religions is in itself an object not only inno-
cent, but meritorious, and one .which we all
wish to see effected : but in the next passage,
the wicked purppse begins to appear, to brmg
about an equal representation of the peoplei
of this country, studiously avoiding the inser-
tion of parliament, is an undertaking of the
most dangerous tendency, and so artfully
drawn up, that it appears to be the work of
no common man: Let. me, therefore, aaaia
caution vou against the crimes into vthim it
may lead you, and which appear to be nothing
short of an attempt to enect a violent and
forcible revolution in the country: the re-
mainder of the oath consists of an engage-
ment not to inform, or give evidence against
any member of that society ; have you re-
flected, that every prosecutor has by the law-
of the land, a right to require your attendance
to give evidence on any trial in a court of jus-
tice ? there you must swear to tell the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, and then
you will find yourself bound by the oath of
this society to commit deliberate perjury. I
therefore once more exhort and intreat you,
if you have entered into that society, to con-
tinue in it no lonoer.

Mr. Baron SmtlA.— I believe, and indeed I
am sure, that many, too many persons have
been seduced into the society of United
Irishmen, and have been the dupes of the re-
morseless ambition of some, and of the unfeel-
ing profligacy of others -. if you ever have been
in tnat society, I hope vou were amongst the
least guilty of its members, and that you are
become sensible of its wicked and dang^erous
tendency ; what is now required of you is not
unreasonable ; and if you shall make any ob-
jection to take the oath of allegiance re-
quired of you, it will be strong evidence of
guilty design.

The Fruanen then took the oath of a)le»
giance and were discharged, having also en-
tered into recognizances for their ifood be-
haviour.

IIS&I SS GEOKGS UL IVial ofGegrgt HUahmkerJar SeiUian [i 136

637, Proeeedings is the High Comt of Juatidary at Edinburgh,
agadnst 6eoko£ Mw^aluaker,* oa an Ittdietment, charg-
ing him with Sedition, and administering unlaMrful Oaths^
10th, 11th, and 12th of Jannaty: 39Gj:oegi: IIL a. d.
1798.

Cum JuptkiflM S. D. N. Rcpi IcnU in
NovaSessioiiiB Domo «le' Bdttifa«i)(by <le-
cimo ^e Jamiurn^ milleanmo seplmgefr-
teiinio et nonogesuiio octeVQ, per hono*-
fftbiles vinos Dwrkbus Ktte de Eskgrove,
DoiBinwn Qulielmuni' Nairoe de Dui^
aitiimo^ BHOBcUim^ Oulidaaum Craig
de Cnigy et Davideia Smyth de Meth^
"veB, Doninos CommiiaKnnnoa Justicia-
rtiedidi 8. J>. N. Regis.

Curia legitime affirmata.

OecTfe Meahnakery wetter ib Dundee, pre-
sent pmoner in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh,
Pknety

Indicted and aeonsed at the instance of
Robert Dundas, esqiure, of Amistofi, his ma-
jesty's advocate for his majesty's interest for
the crime of sedition, and others in mamier
ntentioDed in the criminal libeL raised agjamst*
him thereanent, bearine

That aHieit, by the lawa of this, and of
every oth^r well*govemed realm, seditiott is a
criaseofan heinous nature and severely mh
nishabler ah» wbeaias by an act passM in
the 3rth year of our reign, cap» 193, mtituled,
'^An Act for more effsctualfy preventingfthe
adminislering or taking* of unhiw Ail ^Ntths,** it
is Mer alicf statuled and oidaincd, «< That
** any person or persons who shall in any
** manner or form whatsoever, administer or
''cause to be administemd, or be aiding* or
** assisting at, or present at and consenting to
'« the administering or taktntf of any oath or
'^ engagement purporting ormsnded to tind
** the person taking the same to eng^ in
^ any mutinous or tedittous purpose; or to

disturb th^ p«iMlc peaoe; or to be of any
*' association, society, or oonMerary, formed
^ for any such purpose ; or to obey the orders
M or commands of any committee or body of
** men not lawfb]^ constituted ; or of any
<' leader or commander, or other person not
** having authority by law for- that purpose ;
** or not to inform' or give evidenco against
*^ any associate, confodemte, or otherperson :
** or not to reveal or discover any imhtwliil

** combmation or coofRierBcy ; or not to re«

■*" - - ■ ■■ <^ .1 . ■ ,

* As to this person, see Ihe trial of Fysche
Palmer, a«e^, vol. S^, p. S97, and the proceed-
ings of the Britisfar CoaventioD pp. 901 er ag.
of the same volumes

€t

^ veal OP disover any illegal acl dtone or ta
'' be dnae ; or not to reveal or diaoover an^
'^ iUegaloiitfa Qrei>gagcii|.ont- whaeh may have
** bean adminialered or tcodertd to or t«kc»
^ by sodh pessoB or persons, or to or by
** any other person erpevsont. or the Import
** of any siiah cmtboreBgagsment, shall, on
'< conviction thereof by due oouise of law, bm
'' a^pidpd guilty of felony, and miqrbetmB»-
** ported for any term'of years not exceedhir
''-seven years; and eiery person who shafi'
'^take any such oath or engagement, not
" beinff- compelled theretcs shalC on coovie**
" tion thereof by doe course of law, be ad-
" judged ffuihy of felony, and maybe trans-
" ported Str any term of years not eacneding
"seven years:" Yav teue rr is amo or
vsanT, That the aaid Geom Mealmaker
above coauilainrdapon, is guilty aelor, m art
and part- of -an and each, or one orotfaerof idie
aforesiid crimes s In so far as^ sometime linr*
inr the^ couise of the year 179f , a numbor of
sedhiiiis and evil disposed persons did^ ii»
varioos parts of Soofeland, and paitiealariy ia
the owmtiea of Fife, Ferfor, and Perth, tonn
themaelvea into an association denominaied
" I^ 9M:i€fy of United SeotMmen,'' the object
and purpose of which was, under the pretext
of reifbrni, and the obtaimng of anmal parlia*
mentaand universal suirage, to create in the
nsibdt of the people a spintor dtaanectioaand
diil^yalty to the long, and the eatablished g»»
vemmeat, and ultimately to excite and stir
them up to acts of violence and opposition to
the laws and constitulioQ of this countiy; and
which unlawful and seditious associatKo, tli»
mi^ oftclnaUy to gain its ofc^tet; was mou-
lasiy and ipratemaiKally formed upon rules
and vemdatmna moit artfully adapted to th*
wickea and seditmoa purposes it bad in vtew^
such as the foimalioii of smattclubs orsoeie*
tiettinvariouapartaof the Oountiy, vritfa ofi«
otn betonging to them ciiosen by ballet, as
prmdn^t Merctartt, end tfreeiairer ; the sobdi«
vision of these* crabs or aocieties, when the
numbers of the tndtvkhialt'COBBposingthem
ameuntad to stxteen into other doba under
similar regulations; the formation of comaut-
tees called oarockialp amtUy^ praoineialy and
n&ikmai; tne nominntien of dtkgdUi from
each society and committee to attend thw
higher committees ; the ekctioa (by what ia
caUed) the Naiimmi Commkiu of a Secret
OommHtteC const^ling of seven members ; thw
contributing of smafi fines to pay the eiqmisea

J 137]

Md udminidering ukkAij^ Oaila.

A. D. 179?.

[1138

of deUgaiet i the establisbing cf $ign$ and
counter-sigui and of private vordtf the better
to conceal as well as to promote the as90cia-i
tion ; and lastly the administering of oaths.
to those who are admitted members, binding
them to persevere in endeavouring to obtain
the objects of the association, in defending to
their utmost, those who roav be prosecuted
for their concern in such illegal measures ;
and above all, binding them to declare in the
most solemn mauner by what is called a TeU
of Secrecy y ** That nei:her hopes, fears, re-
^' wards or punishments should ever induce
** them, directljT or indirectly, to inform on,
^' or give any evidence against any member or
** members of this, or similar societies for any
«< act or expression of theirs done or made, col-
*^ lectivel^ or individually, in or out of this
«< society in pursuance of this obligation," of
vrhich dangerous and seditious association,
formed upon the principles above described,
the said George Mealmaker is a leading mem-
ber, and did sometime in the vear 1796 or
1797 administer to others, and did himself
take the different oaths, or obligations, the
import and tendency of which have been
above libelled, and did in the course of the
months of May, June, July, August, Septem-
ber, or October last at Dundee, county of
Forfar,— at Cupar of Angus, parish of Cupar
Angus and county of Forfar or Perth— ana at
Cupar, parish of Cupar, and County of Fife —
ana otner places to the public prosecutor
unknown, wickedly ,and feloniously endeavbur
to the utmost of nis power to promote and
advance the obiects and purposes of the fore-
said wicked and seditious association : Mobs
PARTICULARLY, the Said George Mealmaker
did, sometime in the months of August, Sep-
tember, or October last, at Dundee aforesaid,
attend the meeting of Delegates belonging to
the said seditious association, who had assem-
bled/rom different places, such as Brechin,
Kerry rauir, Cupar of Angus, and Dundee (the
said George Mealmaker bein^ named dele-
gate for Dundee aforesaid), and did at the
meeting aforesaid take the chief lead in en-
deavour! ug to promote the objects of the as-
sociation ; and did, among otner things, pro-
pose that a deleeatc to the National Committee
should be named, and who was named accord-
ingly. Further, the said George Mealmaker
above cemplained upon did in the course of the
years 1796 or 1797, at Dundee aforesaid, and at
other places to the prosecutor unknown, wick-
edly, and feloniously distribute and circulate, or
cause to be distributed and circulated, various
seditious and inHammatory papers or pamph-
lets, the general tendency of which was,- to
excite a spirit of disloyalty to the king, and of
disaffection to the existing laws and constitu-
tion of Great Britain : In PARTicuLAa a paper
or pamphlet of the above description and ten-
dency, intituled '* The Moral and Political
*' Catechism of Man, or a Dialogue between
" a CUueen of tht World, -and an Inhabitant
^' of Britain,^' (which was composed, «nd

VOL. xxvi.

written, or caused to be composed, written,
and printed by the said George Mealmaker) :
As also a paper or publication, intituled
" lUiolutioni and Constitution of the Society of
'* United Scotsmen :** More particularly the
said George Mealmaker did sometime in the
course of the months of May, June, July,
August, September, or October last, at Dun-
dee aforesaid^ or at Cupar of Angus aforesaid,
wickedly and feloniously distribute and send,
or cause to be distributed and sent to Robert
Bain, weaver in Cupar of Angus, two dozen
copies, or thereby of the aforesaid seditious
and inflammatory publication, intituled V The-
'* Moral and Political Catechism of Man, or a
** Dialogue between a Citizen of the World
'' and an Inhabitant of Britain.^ Further
the said George Mealmaker did, sometime in
the course of the months aforesaid, at Dundee
aforesaid, or at some other place to the prose-
cutor unknown, wickedly and feloniously dis-
tribute and send, or cause to be distributed*
and sent to Robert Sands, weaver in Perth,
100 copies, or thereby, of the said Catec/iism^
with orders to the said Robert Sands to sell
and dispose of as many of them as he could :
Further, the said George Mealmaker did, at
Dundee aforesaid, and sometime in the course
of the months aforesaid, wickedly and felo-
niously distribute to David Douglas, wright in-
Cupar of Fife, four copies,or thereby, of the said
Catechism, as also four copiesor thereby of the
aforesaid uaper or writing intituled ** Resolu-
'' tions ana Constitution ot the Society ofUnitcd.
** Scotsmen :" Further, the said George Meal-
maker did, on the eighth day of November
1797, or on one or other of the days of that
month or of the month of October immediately
pecedin^ or of December immediately follow-
ing, at Dundee aforesaid, wickedly and felo-
niously deliver to William White, wright in
Cupar of Fife aforesaid, and . Robert Bell«
weaver therej several copies of the aforesaid
paper or publication, intituled " The Moral
** and Political Catechism of Man, or a Dia-
" logue between a Citisen of the World and
** an Inhabitant of Britain -.*' As also several
copies of the aforesaid paper or publication,
intituled " Resolutions and Constitution of
" the Society of United Scotsmen :" Fur-
ther, the said George Mealmaker did, on the
evening or night ot the said eighth day of
Noveinber 1797, or on one or other ot the
days or nights of that month, or of the month
of October immediately preceding, or of De-
cember immediately following, at Dundee
aforesaid, wickedly and feloniously administer
to the said Robert Bell, previous to his deli-
vering to him as aforesaid the copies of the
aforesaid writings or papers, an oath and en-
gagement* called " TAi? Test for Secretary''
(and which oath or engagement is adminis-
tered to those who are chosen secretary to^
and entrusted with writings •beloneing to, any
society or club of tb«t aforesaid seditious asso-
ciation) importing *' That he would in safety
'' keep all papers and documents received by

4D

N

1 130] 58. GEORGE til. Trial ffCmrgi Meahiaier/or SidtHon [1 140

' ' him as secrefarjr ; and tlwl b« would not
<* give aBjf of tbeA,* or any copy or cepies of
** them to any penon or persons, nwrobors or
•< others, but by a vote of the society, &e. :**
itnd the said George Mealmaker, having on
the ninth day ot November 1797, been
brought before Alexander Riddoch, esq. pro-
vost of Dundee, did in bis presence emit and
sign two separale declarations : which decla-
ratiqfisv together with five copies of the
paper or pamphlet intitiiYed ** The Moral and
'* Political Catechism of Man, or a Dialogue
<* between a Citizen of the World and an in-
" habitant of Britain :** As also five oofnes of
the paper or writing intituled " Resolutions
'' and Constitution of the Society of United
« Scotsmen :" As also the following letters
fhund in the custody of the said George Meal-
maker, vis. Letter, dated Ed' 99 Jane 1797^
s)snf*d T. M'Cliesb, with the following part
ofthe address only remaining, ^ Mealmakeir,
" weaver, Dundee;*' letter dated Edinburgh
July ttotfi 1797, signed T. M<Cliesb^ and ad-
dressed ** Mr. George Mealmaker, weaver,
** Seagate, Dundee, wt a parcel ;" letter datea
Edinr August 10* 1797, signed T. M<GUesh,
but no part of the address rvmatnmg; let-
ter dated Edin' 3^ August 97, signed T.
M'Cliesb, addressed Mr. George Mealmaker,
" weaver, Seagate, w* a parcel, the rest
of the address being tore off: letter dated
Edirlurgh, Thursday evening, beginntnjg
'< Dear Citu," signed T. M<Cliesh, and a^
dressed, '^ Mr. George M^lmaker, weaver,
•* Seagate, Dundee:'' Letter dated Kilfy, 11th
August, 1797, signed James Coc4r, beginning,
" Fel^ Sttto,'' and addressed '« Mr. George
'' Mealmaker, weaver, Stegate> Dundee i^
As ALSO two pamphlets or publications, the
one intituled *< Gen^H a Fragment; contaio-
** injg some account ofthe Life of the devoted
** Citizen who was sent as a Deleeate to the
^* British Convention at Edinb'urgn^ by the
" London Corresponding Society. For acting
" in which capacity, he is now transported to
** Botany Bay for fourteeo years ! ! !" The
other '*. John Bull starving to pay the Debts
** of the Royal PiYMligaf:*' As Atso two
slips of paper, the one liavins the following
writing upon it : ^ George Mealmaker, Sea-
" gate, Dundee, 9 or S TV ami Ute other
having the following writing upon it : " Sent
" by ^cretaryof a ftrochial:" As also copy
of the foresaid " RtiohtUmt and CwnlUutum
** of the Socidy of Umted Scotsmen^** attested
by the subscriptions of Mary Miller and
Alexander Fichny, will all be U!>ed in evidence
against the said Georee Mealmaker, and will
fiTr that purpose he li^dged In the hands of
the clerk of the high court of justitiary be-
fore which he is to be tried ; that he may
have an opportunity of seeing the same. Ar
LEAST times and places above libelled the
aforesaid seditious association was fori^ied;
the aforesaid acts ofiteditien were eolnmltted;
the aforesaid Wi^inga or pubMrations eireu*
lated as afonfsald, i^nd ih& said oath and en-

gagement admbfiistered as aforesaid : and tb»
saiu George Mealmaker above complained
upon, is goilty actor, or art and part, of all
and each, or one or other, of the aforesud
acta. Ale. wnicn, or part thereof, being fonnd
woven by the verdict of an assize bemre the
lord justice general, lord justice Clerk, and
k>rds commissioners of justiciar}^ in a court
of justiciary, to be holden by them within
the criminal court-house of Edinburgh, upon
the tenth day of January neit to come, the
said Georse Mealmaker above complained
noon, ongpttobe punished with the pains
or law, to deter others from committing the
like crimes in all time coming. *

-The libel being read over to the panel in
open court, and ne being interrogated tfaere-
npon, be answered'— Not GviLTT.

JProeurators/or the ProuaUor.

RoBBRt DiTNOAS, csq. of Amlston, his ina^
jestv's advocate [afterwards lord chief baioa
of the covrt of Exchequer].

Mt. RoB«ET Blair, advocate, his tnajesty's
solicitor^general [afterwards Lord Presidm
Ofthe Court of Session].

Mr. Jonv Bubhett, advocate.

ilgen^.— Mr. Hugh Warrender.

FroourtOon/at the PmuL

Mr. John Clerk, advocate, and
Mr. Alexander Whyte, Advocate.

AgmtLp^Mu Sievewright.

Mr. Akx. ITAyfe, junior cotmse! for the
panel, rose to state his objections to the rele-
vancy of the libel. ' He bejgan by observing,
that whatever political principles he might
find it necessary to touch upon in the course
of his pleading, yet the tenets held by certain
men relative to public matters, he could bv
no means sobscnbe to, because he for himself
must say, that no one bore a more zealous
afl^tion to the constitution of the country
than he did. Having so stated, he proceeded
to read the libel, from which he said these
Questions naturally occurred, viz. First, a.« to
tne le^lity of such meetings. — Second, as to
theopinion of universal snfirage.— Third, sup*
posing the charges brought against the pan^
to be proved, wliat species of sedition it
amonnted to. Upon these points be pro-
ceeded to quote several ancient acts 'of par-
liament from some of which he argued^ that
the inciting to commotion was not sedition^
nt»less commotion actually ensued. As to
the point of universal suffrage, he remarked^
that hoidine such a sentiment, and eipressmg
it too, tould never be construed as cfrimimJ.
Some of the highest characters in the coun-
try beld that opinion; in proof of whidi he
could refer to a meeting which was bneld in
ir^, at the Thatched House Tavern, whea

■AM

^ Mfo the Society juf United Seott^sen,
and tbeiir proceedings^ see Buttitftt tte' the
Criminal Law of Scotland, 2M.

1141]

^nd adminidering wAngfU Oaikt^'

A. D. 1796.

Ihe duk€ of Richmood, and many members
DOW high ia administration, were present,
and Mr. Pitt himself took a leading and ac-
tive part. It is true, he was not then mi-
nister, but though he may have changed his
sentiments, yet he then declared, tl^t the
only means remaining for the salvation of
this country was annual parliaments and uni-
versal sufirage.* It was not then said that
such meeting was illegal, or that such senti-
ments were inimical to the constitution of
the country ; on the contrary, such were' the
opinions entertained of those specific resolu-
tions, that the persons who framed them
were looked up to as the savioura of the
country.

Many eminent men have hM similar sen-
timents and espre&sed them loo, and, in allu-
sion to the system of government, Mon-
tesquieu says, that the constitution must
pertth whenever the legislative power be-
oeeomes more corrupt than the executiTe.—
In the trials which took place here in 1793,
it was stated that the British Convention
having adopted the terms of the French Con-
tention, showed that they had similar ob-
jects in view. Now, if such was considered
the criminal part of their conduct, it must
follow that the societies against which the
charges are now brought cannot be criminal,
for they have not adopted any of these terms.
But it will not be proved, that the panel was
a member of these societies, or that he ever
^id administer the oath charged. And even
were it proved that he did administer the
oath, it will be shown that such oath was
not criminal, havmg no reference whatever to
the act of parliament, on which the libel was
founded. One part of the regulations of the
-society says, " that it becomes us to meet for
the purposes of examining the principles of
the constitution, that the defects thereof
tnay be pointed out, and a timeW reform ob-
tiuned, so that the dread liil calamity which
has befallen a neighbouring nation may be
prevented." Now it may be asked whether
in this there is any thing criminal. It is be-
sides expressly stated in their rules, that they
are to seek after a returm by peaceable means.
In the House of Commons, although the
members have certain privileges of speech,
yet were they to alter what was inimical to
the constitution, they might and would be
indicted. On the motion made by Mr. Grey
for a Parliamentary Ueform, Mr. Fox expressed
himself in terms stronger than what has been
imputed to these societies.

Mr. Whyte next proceeded to read several
quotations fh>m the Political Catechism, te-
lative to the ^vernment of the country, and
the right of kmgs to the throne. These4oc-
trioes were similar to the opImoM held by
Algernon Sydney ; and many dtfaer etminent
It probably, however, will be replied

[1148

that Algernon Sydney fell a sacrifice for these
opinions; but surely there is net one of your
lordships on the bench, nor a gentleman in
court, who does not wish, for the honour of
the country, that the falc of that illustrious

Striot was for ever blotted from our records,
r never was there a man who stood more
firm in defence of liberty, and in opposition
to the most execrable tyranny. The libel
farther states that the panel administered the
oath of secrecy to Bell, It may be said, if
the measures to be pursued by these societies
were of fair and honest intention, why all
this secrecy ?— This is my answer — they knew
that if they had dared to asf^mble openly for
these purposes, sueh is the intolerance of the
times, they would have been held up as oh*
jects of persecution ; for I do maintain that
such is tne intolerance of the times at pre*
sentf that there are many men who hold this
sentiment, that the only proof of attachment
to the constitution is an unqualilied a]>proba»
tionof the measures of the present ministry.
After referring again to the same law autho-
rities to define the term sedition, and making
many apposite remarks, he concluded a very
able speech by pressing this observatk>n, that
the right of petitioning and of meeting to pe-
tition for redress of grievances is a rieht in-
herent in the poorest cottager as well as in
the proudest peer.*

Mr. Burnett remarked, that the^libel was
of a nature charging crimes much more dan-
eerousand alarming than any that had ever
been brought before the Court. It stated a
systematic plan (or convulsing^ the countrv,
and overturning the government; and tins
plan had been so iar carried into effect, that
committees had been instituted, and meetings
held, for forming a society of United Scots-
men. It has been said that sedition is a
generic term ; and that it becomes the pro-
secutor to define the nature of it. It is not,
necessary to talm up the lime of the Court to
argue upon that point. Your lordships have
repeatealy given your opinions t4pon that
suoject.t SMItlon is not what ii hi^s now
been argued it is — a rising of the people, or
actual tumult; for if an act of that nature
takes place, it ceases to be sedition, it be*
comes treason. Sedition is that which tends
to create disaffection in the minds of the
people, and to alienate their affections from
the government of the country .>-The pretext

«»*■

• But see the Note to GeisaU's case, an<^,
Vol. SS^ p. d39.

* '* The relevaoey was debated on nearly
^ the same grounds as in the trials in the
«' year 1704; and an objection was taken to
*' the indictment in so far as it was laid on
** the 37 th id the icing, that this^statute was
^ enacted with a view chiefly to mutiny m
^ the army or fieet, aod was not meant to
*^ apply to ft ease of this kind. The Court,
^ however sustained the indictment.'^ JBar-

M(#, Ma

t See the Scots trials in the tSrd Volume
of this Collection.

1143] 38 GEORGE III. Trial of George Mealmakerfor SedHion [ 1 144

of iDeeting to petition for reforin is used to
cover the great object these societies have in
view of creating commotion and disloyalty. ,
The several acts of parliament which have |
been referred to, could not have been taken ,
to found this indictment on, because they do >
not apply ; but even though that were not
the case, it could not prevent the public pro* '
secutor from laying the libel on common law,
which gives a jurisdiction to your lordships
over almost any crime that can be committed, i
Mere speculative doctrines on government, it I
is true, do not form crimes cognizable by a i
court of justice ; but surely such a species of ;
doctrine as has been propagated by the panel '
in this catechism, is the most dangerous that
can be conceived. The whole tendency of it
is, to represent the monarchical part of our
constitution as tyranny, and that nobility and
titles of honour ought to be abolished. Will
any court of justice say, that such doctrines
are to be considered as merely speculative,
especially when taken in connection with the
other parts of the panel's conduct, and as
connected with these societies? With regard
to the reference made to sentiments delivered
in the House of Commons by certain mem-
bers, Imay only say, with due deference to
the priyile^s of that House, that if some of ;
)these sentiments are not seditious, they are
at least not a little inflammatory ; and 1 may
be allowed to repeat an observation made by
a member who, when speakineof the sedi-
tion bills, said, that, if they bad no other
good efl'ect, they would at least have this,
viz. of confining sedition within the walls of
that House. Mr. Burnett concluded by ob-
serving, that he did not think it necessary for
him to reply to some parts of the learned
gentleman's speech, as the observations did
not appear strictly applicable to the case.

Mr. Clerk replied to Mr. Burnett.— AAer
several observations upon the nature of the
crime of sedition— be observed, that the libel
states the panel entered into a society for the
purpose of exciting sedition; but he would
ask, why does it not point out how he did so f
—for the appointment of a committee, and
the secrecy alluded to are no crimes of them-
selves.—1 he libel also states that the panel
was a leading .member, but it does not say in
what respect he was so. It also sUtes, that
the objects of this society were of a seditious
nature; why does it not precisely state V hat
these were? and then the panel would know
what charges he bad to defend himself
against Sedition is charged in general, but
there is not one specific f&ct founded on in
^he whole libel. There is a charge of admi-
nistering a test of secrecy, but ^ere is the
barm ot this, if the nature of the society be
innocent? It has been broadly stated that a
person may publish his sentiments on govera-
inent, in a speculative form* without punish-
ment ; and yet, when an answer was made to
the same doctrine, hekl by the learned gen-
tleman who spoke first, it is said We are to

look to the object and tendency of this cate-
chism, whilst at the same time, he says, that
the panel knew better than td publii^h his
sentiments in anv other form than as specu-
lative. This surely is not argument — I would
then ask . what is speculative and what not f
The libel states these societies to have been
formed in 1797, and yet charges the panel
with crimes committed with them in 1796. —
The act of parliament on which the libel ts
founded was only passed on the 19th July
1797, and yet the crimes charged are said to
have been committed in May, June, July,
Au8;u9t,and October J 797. — Will it ever be
said that this can*l>e a relevant charge? Will
the act be made to have a retrospective eflfect»
when it does not so bear ? The libel states
that the panel administered the oath to Bell,
but that oath is merely to keep papers. It
does not state that Bell was a member of the
society, and it frequently happens the secre-
tary of a society is not a memoer. Mr. Clerk
next proceeded to examine the terms of the
oath, &c. upon which he made several inge-
nious remarks.

The SoUcUor General shortly ubsenred.
That, with regard to the act of parliament,
certainly no punishment could be mflicted by
that act for any crime committed prior to the
date at which it was passed ; but if the charges
are found proved tfi have happened since the
passing of the act, then it would apply to
those charges.

Their lordships proceeded to deliver their
opinions upon the libel, which were unani-
motis in finding it relevant.

The following interlocutor was accordingly
recorded :

The Lords Commissioners of Justiciary,
having considered the criminal libel
raised and pursued at the instance of his
Majesty's Advocate, for his Majesty's
Interest against George Mealmaker^
Panel; they find the libel relevant to
infer the pains of law; but allow the
Panel to prove all facts and circum-
stances that may tend to exculpate him
or alleviate his guilt; and remit the panel
with the libel as found relevant, to the
knowledge of an assize.

(Signed) David Rae, J. P. D.

The Lard Advocate then stated, that, as the
trial would probably be of lone continuance,
and as the proceedings of this day had occu-
pied so much time, he thought he should dis-
charge his duty better to the Court, the jury,
and the country, by delaying farther proce-
dure till to-morrow. He moved the Court acr
cordingly, which was agreed to.

The Lprds Commissioners of Justiciaryp
continue the diet min^t the Panel, and
whole other diets ofCourt, till to-morrow
at ten o'clock forenoon in this place :
And ordain parties, witnesses, assiaers,
and all concerned, then to attend, each
uader the pains of Uw ; and i^aio ihm

1145]

mnd adminutering unlamfid Oalks.

A. D. 1798.

ZUi6

panel in the meantime to be carried back
to prison.

Curia Justiciaria S. D. N. Rc^s tenia in
Nova Sessionis Doino de Edinburgh, un-
decinio die Januarii, millesimo septin*
gentcsimo ct nonogesimo octavo. — Per
honorabiles viros, Davidem Rae de £sk>
grove, Duminum Gulielmum Nairne dc
DuDsinnan, Baronctum, Gulielmum
Craig de Craig, et Davidem Smyth de
Methven, Dominos Commissionarios
Justiciaris diet. S. D. N. Regis. '

■ Curia legitime affirmata.

Georfe Mealntaker^ weaver in Dundee, pre*
sent prisoner in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh,
pane).

Indicted and accused aa in the -preceding
sederunt.

The interlocutor of relevance being read
over in open Court, the lords proceeded to
name the following persons to pass upon the
assiie of the panel.

Thomas Sanderson, merchant in Edinburgh.

Alexander Smith, banker there.

Robert Thomson, merchant there.

Dfxvid Kinnear^ banker there.

Alexander Wallace, banker there.

George Ramsay^ banker there.

Andrew Bonar, banker there.

John Wood, solicitor at law there.

James More, bookbinder there.

David Hunter, merchant there.

John Walker, merchant there.

James Cochran, printer there.

James Goldie, merchant there.

Donald M'Lean, merchant there.

William Turnbull, merchant there.

Who were all lawfully swom^ and no objec-
tion to the contrary.

The first witness called was John Aiikcn,
weaver in Newton of Cupar, parish of Cupar,
and county of Fife ; he said he could not be
positive, but thinks he has been in company
with the panel --knows of an association in
Cupar Fife, of which he was a member, called
United Scotsmen — was admitted a member
about harvest last. George Patterson told
him first of the society. Robert Henderson
admitted him when in his house, where he
saw a copy of resolutions, which contained
rules of the society. He did not take any
oath. It was two days after he got the paper
that he was admitted — The form of admission
was by reading of the paper. [Here the wit-
ness was shown a printed paper, containing
the resolutions and an oath relative to pro*
curing a parliamentary reform, &c.] The
witness said he did not understand it to be an
oath— 'he and Henderson had each a hold of
the book open reading it, but neither of them ■
fasld up their hands. .Another oath of secrecy

in the same book he also read over, but did
not then understand he was bound to keep
any thing secret, though afterwards at another
meeting he did. The society was formed of
small clubs, who were never to meet above
the number of sixteen — ^The witness belonged
to a meeting of six members; there were,
however, other meetings having office bearers.
He ivas secretary in his nieetmg, and kept a
printed book. Never saw any writing in bis
club, and they had no fixed place of meeting.
--There were committees belonging to the so-
cieties, named parochial, county, and national.
Delegates were named from the societies.
The witness once paid a penny, which he un*-
derstood was collected to* pay the expences of
the delegates. — He knows that it was part of
the rules of the society to have a secret com*
niittee. He knew the signs of the society,
which were ** to join the two bands, mixing
the fingers, and still keeping them so, turn
the hands with palms out— answered by put*
tine the one hand on the back of the other,
ana mixing the fingers.'' The words used
were, I love light — I hate light. The so-
cieties kept up a correspondence, by sending
deputations to visit each other ; believes there
were more than four societies in Cupar ; has
heard there were clubs in Leslie, Ceres, and
Auchtermuchty. — One person came from
Auchtermuchly to the witness about business
at Dunfermline, concerning the society. — ^He
sent for the witness to John Davidson's pub-
lic-house—The witness did not know him,
but understood he was an United Scotsman
by his conversation about the society. — He
had a slip of paper with the witness's name on
it. — The witness was at that time secretary
to his club. — ^The stranger said the folk at
Dunfermline had held a meeting, and they
were surprised there was not a member from
Cupar. . One rule in the society was, that
each member was to get as many members
made as he could. The witness has been pre-
sent when members were admitted. The
person admitted read over the book, and then
signed it. The witness, as a member of Cu-
par club, was sent to Dundee, by William
Smith, a tailor in the New Town. He said
you must go to Dundee, and get anv news
there about parliamentary reform. — The wit^
ness did not understand himself to be a dele-
gate, and at first refused to go, but Smith sent
a message to him some days after bv John
Moir, who brought a line, desiring him to
call at George Mcalmaker, Dundee, to get
news with regard to parliamentary reform— >
Understood at the time that this business was
for the society of United Scotsmen. Had
never seen Mcalmaker before, but beard of a
book he had published, entitled, The Moral
and Political Catechism of Man. The wit*
ness got a copy from William Smith, which
James Gibbs bnce got from him, and he has
also shown it to several persons in his own
house. At the time the witness went to Dun«
deCi he was. paid his expences by William

1 147J 38 GBORGE III. Trid <f George Mtdmalcerfir SedUiim [1 148

Bmith, ra. twentj-wven pence for bit ex- ^
Mttccs, aod eigti teen -pence as hischiy's wages.
When the witness called at Mealmakcr's
house in Dundee, be was not at home, but a
woman in his house showed the witness to a
public bouse, where he asked the senrant
whether there was any men in, upon which
she opened a room door, and he went in, and
saw some men, none of whom he knew. He
would not have gone in unless he had thought
that Meal maker had been there. One of the
men asked him where he came from. He an*
swered from Cupar, upon which they desired
him to sit down ; no signs were used. — ^They
talked upon any thing, such as mmlefacturing.
One said he came from Kerriemvtr, an-
other from Brechin, and a third from Cupar
Angus. Understood they had met on the W
ainess of United Scotsmen. Some men were
there which he understood were tmui Dun-
dee, as they were not in travelling dress.—
After sitting some time, one person aaked
the witness how the society w«b at Cupar
Fife? He answered it was still going on—
The same was said by tlie other persons pre-
sent as to their places, and it was also men-
tioned that it was going on too in Ireland.
He also heard that the army and navy wanted
t parliamentary reform, and was told there
vvaa about 70^000 in one town in England.
The peraon who said this had not on a tra-
velling dress. It was one of the three Dun-
dee men, but does not know which of them.
There was a national committee spoken of,
and one of those present was chosen to go to
the national meeting. The form of choosing
him waa tbi»*-0Be man stood up, and each
9f the company whispered into him the name
of the person who was to go, and he -was to
do justice between man and man, but was
not to reveal the name of the person who was
chosen, except to the person himself.

Here the witness was strongly urged by the
Court and counsel to say who be believed the
persoA was who stood op. He repeatodiv said
he did not know, nor could he guess who he
vraSy that thowgh be voted for that person
4o be appointea to go to the meeting, yet he
only, when he voted, said wmrteiff without
nentioning any name. Alter again being
«rrged, he at last sud, he understood the per-
aon to be George Mealmaker.

The witness never after told any one who
was the person for whom he voted. George
Smith asked him what was done, but he only
answered that they had chosen a person to
so to the meeting. When met to choose the
4(alegate at Dundee, none of them received
their own names, bat the name of the place
from which they came. The witness got the
mme of Cupar, Fife, another the name of
Ktriiemw, Brechin, Ac.

Q. If William Svkh had asked, whom did
jou vela for, what answer would you have
msde?

Tbt wkneu i«|i^Aedly said, he did not

know what he would have answerad, hut at
last said, George Mealmaker. The witness
considered himself bound to secrecy, so that
if any person had asked him the name, h«
would not have told him. He now thinks
the panel was one of the persons whom he
saw at the public- house at Dundee, and tliat
he is the person into whose ear he whispered
to eo to the National Committee. There was
a day fixed for a meeting at Brechin, about
three or four weeks after. Knows that David
Christie, a weaver in Cupar, was sent to
Leslie upon the business of the society.—
Knows one Waller Brown, a cleaner of yam.
He spoke to the witness about the societiea,
and said he wanted to see the book, but never
showed him it ; nor did he meet with him,
though he was asked to do so. He had no
particuhu' reason for declining io go to Brown's
bouse. Brown never expressed any scruplea
about the society ; but when he asked him,
the whness, to cone to bia houie to get a
crack, he understood it was to be about United
Scotsmen.

John AitJcen cross-examined.

It was about ten o'clock forenoon the neet-
ing was held at , Dundee ; it continued tili
twelve, when the witness went home. He
never saw the prisoner before or since that
meeting. He merely understood the person
who stood up in the room to be Mealmaker,
because he desired him, the witness, to sit
down. W hen Henderson first mtroduced him
to the society, he never mentioned any thing
of an oath ; neither did he hear the name oP
Mealmaker mentioned. He understood that
all the other clubs were framed on the same
plan as that at Cupar.

William Smithy writing-master in Cupar,
Fife, said he knew of an association of United
Scotsmen at Cupar, of which he was admitted
a member at the beginning of harvest. ^ It
was an understood rule to keep every thing
secret. No minutes wefe kept. Tliere was
a printed jjMiper wfaicb contained the rules
of the iiocietv. The form of his admia^
sion was, the book being given into his hand,
he read the whole from beghming to end^
and then understood himself a member
of Uie society. When a society became- nu-
merous^ it was divided into two for the pur-
poses of secrecy, and for promoting the in-
crease of the nsembers ; there were ahout it
clubs in Cupar. Th^ had na perm^ineni
preset, but one was chosen each mcetiiig;
there ^ae also a sKretary and treasurer. The
treasurer received any money persons chose
to etve to, defrav the ex|iense at reaeiving in-
telfigence, and that of deli^ates. There were
committeeSy parochial, national, dec. and also
a secr^ eommittee. T<hpk«erw aigins whicfa
be described the some aa the foregsiiw wit*
ness. The wittitss waa m iecretaiy. The a*»
cretaries held oomrauaicatlan with each other
in the -town of C(0ar.««»*Reniemfaen beki^
sent for to a hoose hrUupar, wfatTB he saw Ait-

} 149] and administering wdaiHfitt OaAs*

ken and another man, who henndenitood had
come from Auchtennuchty for the purpose of
inquiring about the state of ihe clubs m Cu*
par, but does not know his name.-^There
were some societies tn Dundee.*- Knows John
Aitken was sent from Cupar as a delente to
Dundee.— It was the witness who desired
Aitken to go to Dundee in order to attend a
meeting of the delegates from different places,
and that some persons thought that if he
would call at George Mealroaker, he might
get access to the meeting through him. Aitken
got some money from the funds of the so-
ciety for ^uing to Dundee, and when he re*
turned, Aitken told the witness how he got
into the club there, where he saw some people
met, who were called by the places they came
frcmi ; that they gave in reports, one of which
wa9, that a reform was desired by a great part
of England, and that the army and navy also
desired it. He never said whether he had
aeen George Mealmaker. He but sooke of
a delegate being sent to the National Meet-
ing, and 8upp<»ed it was George Meal-
tnaker. He mentioned the manner of elect-
ing the delegate, the same as foregoing wit-
ness. Aitken made his report to the secre-
tary at Cupar what had been done at Dundee.
The witness, as a secretary, kepi a copy of
a catechism and the rules. Knows David
Douglas, wrigfat, and that he was at Dtmdee
on the business of the society, some time be-
fore Aitken was there. He said that he pur-
chased some catechisms in a house in Dundee,
but declined saying what house it was, ana
at same time got some copies of t)ie rules for
United Scotsmen. Aitken reported, that if a
delegate wouk) go to Brechin, he would get
same reports there also. After the witness
was apprehended at Cupar, bailie Metfaven
came and showed him certain signs, and
asked if these were the signs of United Scots-
men, which he acknowledged they were. Mr.
Methven and Mr. Horsbrough sent for Vf'iU
liam White, wright in Cupar, who came.
Mr. Methven then said to White, that if he
would go to Georee Mealmaker's at Dundee,
he would probalny get some copies of the
Catechism, &c. as none were to be found in
town. This witness then showed White the
Mgns, and the private word was also siven
him. As also, a ^hp of paper, on whi<m he
wrote, Georse Mealmaker^ Seagate, two or
three r, and told White the T meant teaiM.
While then said, he might be at a loss what
to say, upon which the vntness wrote u|)on
another slip, sent by a secretary of a parochial,
which meant of a committee.

William Wkitef wright hi Cupar, smd, Mr.
Methven sent him to Dundee to George Meal-
maker, to deliver a Hnow At same time WH
liam Smith gave him a line, and showed him
some sisn^ with his hands, and that he was
to say, 7 lote %A/, wfnch would be answered,
by another sign, and the words, 1 love dark-
new. He went and found him in a work-
shop, but be took him, the wttues5; to his

A. D. 1798;

11150

house, when he made the sign. Mealmaker
did not return it; but smiM, and asked if
he bad any thing to show for that; upeq
which the witness showed him a line, and
said he got it from Mr. Smith, Cupar, and
wanted some books. He asked whethet
he had ever seen the books? Witness an-
swered, be had once seen them. He asked
if he underwood theai ? Witness said, a little.
Mr. Mealmaker then said, he had some Ca-
techisms, which he would give him to intro-
duce in the country. yVitness said, he had no
money to pay Catechisms; but Mealmaker
answered, it did not signify, he would get
the money at any time. He then brought
him some copies of the resolutions, and
tvrelve copies of the Catechism. The Ca-
techisms were to be 4id. each. Witness
then sent for half a mutchkin of whisky to
Mealmaker's house, which theydrank> and
then he returned home.

[Here the witness looked at the panel,) an4
declared be was the same person be saw
at Dundee.]

Bailie David Metkeen said, having appre-
hended Willmm Smith, he was mformed
there were certain papers, containing oaths
for some societies, and Smith having shown
hhn certain signs^ and given him two slips of
paf»er addressed to George Mealmaker, be
desired W. White to goto Dundee, whidi he
did, and brought two parcels, one sealed; they
contained Catechisms, and eight or nine copies
of another pamphlet. The witness also sent
one Bell to Dundee after White had returned.
He was furnished with a letter te the provost,
and had the same signs, &c. communicated
to him, in order that he might^et access la
Mealmaker, to obtain more knowledge of the
test, &c.

Mr. Charles Graee, physician in Cupar^
said he was present when Wlute retamed from
Dundee, and delivered in to Mr. Methven
two parcels of pamphlets.

Roheri Bell was called, but objected to, be^
cause he had sworn that he would either
swear truth or falsehood for a few shiHiags,
or a smalf sum of money.

Upon this the following witnesses wen
called:

Johm Farfuhartan saidj he knows Robert
Bell in Cupar, and has spoken to him of the
present trial, when in the shop of D. Bell,
merchant in Cupar. 8ome people asJted him.
how he could take the oath as a United Scots-
man to Mealmaker. He answered he could
have sworn all night.

David Bell and John Roths in Cupar-Ff fe;
wend sworn, and deponed to the same effect.

Bobert Beit being brought In, said, he wa$
employeil to go to Dundee, by sheriff Mel*
drum, with a ^er to tfhe provost, and to get
some pamphlets from George Mealmaker.
Before going he was shown a sigOy and dt^
sired to say^ / srisA more %A/. He accordingly

1151] 38 GEORGB III. Tria^ qf George Mealmakerjbr SedUion [ 1 IdS

arrived at Dandee at 10 night. About If
called at Mealmaker's house. Mealmaker
was lookiug out of his window. On goine
into the house, the witness gave the sign, and
Healmaker asked where he got tbat» be re-
plied, it was from a nuin he was acauainted
with in St. Andrew's. Then showea him a
slip of paper ; on which he went out of the
bouse, and his wife sair', he is only going to
the other side of the street, to his mother's;
for be dare not keep the hooks in his own
house. He returned in a few minutes, and
desired the witness to go with biro into a
closet, where he had some small books, which
he asked the witness to take, but he said be
could not pay for them, and that it was not
these he wanted, it was the other books.
Mealmaker said there was nothing to pay for
them. •

Here the witness pointed out in one of the
pamphlets the word parocAia/, the same which
was on the slip of paper. The witness bought
one of the other books, and paid 4d or '^d.
for it, refused to take 19, as they would have
been heavy to carry. Mealmaker then showed
bim how to fold one, by which the oath of
secrecy only was seen, and that was to be
shown only to the person wishing to become a
member, and to be taken before he could be
shown more. Mealmaker asked him if he
bad formerly, taken the oath, he said he had
never taken the test. Mealmaker then in*
sisted he should take it at present, on which
the witness held up his hand and took it, but
having stumbled a little at supplving his name
in place of A. B. as. in the schedule of the
oath, Mealmaker asked why he stumbled, he
answered, because he was not much accus-
tomed to. take oaths. The witness then
thought he would not take it by his real name,
and accordingly took it by the name of James
Walker, readme aloud, and Mealmaker look-
ing on. He told Mealmaker he came frOm
Anstrutber, upon which he asked how many
members were in the town he. came from.
The witness answered about 800, and met
about six or seven at a time. Mealmaker
said these are small meetings, . Witness an*
swered, they were feared for oeiog h^nt,

Alexander Smithy weaver in Newton of
CU|)ar — knows of a society in Fife, called a
Society for Parliamentary Reform. He at-
tenden some meetings*— there was a preses,
treasurer, and secretary, also committees and
delegates. There was no oath; but the person
admitted just took the book in his hand, read
It, and assented to it; in which were, the test
fur ipembers, the test for secretary, and the
test for secrecy. The first and last wece read
over by members entering, but the oM^x they
did not read over, unless the person was U^ be
secretary. Knows John Aitken, who, when
in. Cupar prison, told the witness he had been
at Dundee, attending a meetins. K nows that
David Douglas went to Dun&c, before any
el^b at .Cupar was properly constituted ; and

that he went there to know about the socie-
ties. Douglas, on his return, said, he would
not tell the witness what be had learned at
Dundee, not being a fit person, or secretary of
a parochial. The witness then advised his
club to send a person to get information ; and
William Smith was accordingly named, but
does not know if he went ; he believes, how-
ever, that Aitken went ; he (Aitken) was once
in the club with the witness, but afterwards
went to make another club in a separate pari
of the town. The meeting at Dundee was
for the purposes of learning how many people
might be for parliamentary reform, and heard
there were some people in the navy a.nd army
for reform. Was also told, it was making
rapid (Progress in the Highlands and among
the gentry; but they were to go by them-
selves, and the common people by themselves.
We were to have no communication with any
of. the volunteers, or with the army. The
purpose was for a reform in parliament ; but
here the witness said, he knew so little of that
matter that he could not form an idea of it.
As for universal suffrage, he could never com*
prebend what it meant. The reform was to
oe brought about by petition ; and it was not
to be done till it was known that a great ma-
jority of the nation was for it.

David Douglat^ wright in Cupar — does not
know the panel — never took an oath, so thinks
he is not a member of any society — went to
Dundee some time ago, and bought some
catechisms, along with a man from Ceres;
and he got some pamphlets for nothing — he
^ve them to a company in Cupar, where Wil-
liam and Alexander Smith were present. Did
not know, nor can he say or suppose what the
person's name was from whom he got the
books in Dundee. He had no object in cir-
culating them ; but he gave a copy of the con-
stitution to every person who bought a cate-
chism.

After a variety of questions and evasive an-
swers, he at last recollected seeing the name
of George Mealmaker at the bottom of the
title page — and afterwards be discovered
something about the end of it like a test or
something else. Here he was shown a copy
of it, when he recollected having read some-
thing like it. The name of the lad from
Ceres was Matthew. The witness said he
never saw him afterwards till he came to
Cupar on a Sunday, and he never spake of
these things on Sunday. — Here the lord advo-
cate cave the sign of United Scotsmen, and
asked the witness to answer him. He said
he had seen the signs before, for they were
going' through the town of Cupar. The
person who gave him the pamphlets did
not make these signs,, or speak about laving
ligM.

I
[Here the Court, from the whole com-
plexipa of ,the witness's evidence and
manner of answering, committed him t»

1153]

and athniniitering unlaxvful Oaths.

A. D. 1798.

[1154

prison, for prevarication, iand concealing
the truth .♦]

WoUer Brown, bleacher in Cupar, said he
'was an independent Quaker, and therefore
the Court allowed him to give evidence with-
out an oath. He aiBrmed he was applied to
last harvest in Cupar, by William Morris, to
become a member of a society. When he met
Morris, he said to the witness, I have news
to tell you, he thought he had me, and said
that I must swear. I answered I would not
swear to any thing before I saw it. Morris
then asked the witness to go to Mr. Scott
mill- Wright, to endeavour to get him into the
society. The witness accordmgly went, but
strongly advised him to have nothing to do
with them, for they would ruin him and his
familv, and told him there were some of them
to call upon him tliat night. This passed,
and some time after a riot took place about
the militia near lord Crawford's house — when
the witness heard a man in a crowd say, damn
them altogether for idiots, their houses could
be all burnt before they could get out soldiers.
This struck me, said the witness, and from
the principles of humanity I communicated
this to lord Crawford and Mr. Morrison of
Naughton, and that there was a club going
on, and said, if my person was protectee^ as I
had been threatened, and I also added I was
an old man, and had been neglected ; but that
a svstem was going on which made me shiver,
and would destroy the constitution. The
system I was told, was, that all through Eng-
land were to rise in one day, and all wno held
places, if they resisted, were to be dispatched,
and if they were quiet, they would be only dis-
missed. They were to stop all posts till they
had a republican government fixed. They
also said thev had Sboui 100,000 of the army
now in England engaged, and 25 or 35 of a
troop of horse, who went some time before
out of Cupar, engaged by a sign. The so-
cieties were to consist not of above 16 in
number. Morris told me of Henderson and
Aitken. He said, there were several societies
in Cupar, and some in Dundee, with delegates,
to correspond with one another, and that there
was to be no writing, but they were to know
each other by si^ns, and that men under the
appearance of domg their own business, were

* The following is the entry on the record :

" It having been observed by the Court,^
^< that this witness had been guiltv of gross
« prevarication and concealment of the truth
^< upon oath ; therefore the lords commis-
** sioners of justiciary grant warrant to and
*^ ordain macers of court to apprehend the
'' person of the said David Douglas, and to
'< commit him prisoner to the Tolbooth of
** Edinburgh, as guilty of prevarication and
** concealing the truth upon oath, therein to.
« be detained till he be again brought before
*' this Court.

«• (Signed) David Rae, J. P. D.^'

VOL. XXVI.

to ^0 through the societies. Recollects John
Aitken called upon him one day, and wanted
to talk about that business, but he, the wit-
ness, said, John, I wish that may be a well
concerted plan ; so he said no more.

Robert Sands, weaver in Perth, kiiows that
there were some incendiaries from the west
country proposed to have societies. A mem-
ber from the west country proposed to him
to be a member for parliamentary reform, but
that he would give him more intimation
three weeks afterwards. He said it was to be
kept secret, till the mind of the nation was
more fully known. — About twelve weeks
after he c<illcd on the witness, and lold him
that he had been in Aberdeen, where the
magistrates had laid him nine weeks in gaol ;
that he now advised the witness to have no
more to do with that business, for he saw
those who sent him meant to ruin him, and
that it was fraught with dangerous conse-
quences.— Knows Mealmaker well. He and
the witness were brought prisoners to Perth,
in 1794, and both were members of the Bri-
tish Convention. Has seen the Moral and
Political Catechism, and had intimation from
George Mealmaker that he was to send him
100 copies, but the witness only received 9^.
His letter bade me sell them. The witness
said he had not the letter, and supposes it
went away in the ordinary course of old
letters. The pamphlets came from a Mr.
M*CIeish of Eoinburgh. He sent a card along
with them. The card said, he had, in obedi-
ence to an order from George Mealmaker,
sent him these pamphlets. This card also
went in the usual way. Witness lodged some
of the copies with William Smith at Brid«
gend, ana a person afterwards borrowed his
name, and took them all away. His wife
burnt some copies, because she said she was
constantly tormented by officers. — ^Witness
afterwards wrote to Mealmaker, reprobating
the measures he was pursuing, and saying it
was a villanous scheme, and being secret,
more might be meant than was actually ex-

Iiressed. His answer, in substance, acknow-
edged the propriety of the witness's reason-
ing, and tnat he would take his advice.
Mealmaker assumed the character of being
the author of the Catechism ; hut the witness,
firom circunistances, now thinks that he is
not the author of it.

Robert Bain, weaver in Cupar Angus, fs
acquainted with the panel, recollects him at
Cupar for about three weeks lafit summer,
ana lodged in his house. When there, he
read a good deal, particularly Professor Ro-
binson's late publication. The witness re-
ceived a parcel containing two dozen of Ca-
techisms, which were sent with a letter
signed G. M. Sold all of them soon. There
is a news room in Cupar, which was set up
at the time Mealmaker was going away.

James Todd, Edinburgh, late a farmer, anil
now a partner with Mr. MKDIeish, printer in
Edinburgh. The pamplitet now shown

4 £

1 155] 38 GEORGE III. Trial of George Mealmaktrfar Seiiim [IISS

was printed at his office — and, being shown
some letters, thought the 9^ing9 were like
Mr. M'Cleish's hand-writing. — Has seen
letters from Mealmaker to Mr. M'Cleish ; but
does not recollect whether they said any thing
about printing the Catechism. Does not
think Mr. Mealmaker employed his office,
but rather thinks it came from Mr. Caw's
office ; and afterwards he had no doubt there
was a correspondence about printing the
pamphlet, between Mr. M'Cleish and Meal-
maker. Several other articles were printed,
such as Mr. Pitt's Speech on the Finances, j
Pope's Essay on Man, and the Weaver's Com-
panion, which last was sent to Mr. M'Cleish,
through the recommendation of Mealmaker.
He once saw a letter signed Geor&e Meat-
maker, ordering some of the Catechisms to
be sent to Perth.

John Henderson^ journeyman printer with
Mr. M'Cleish, knows the Moral and Political
Catechism was printed in that office.

William Moncrieff^ town officer in Dundee,
was employed to apprehend George Meal-
maker, which he did about six weeks ago.
lie found some papers and letters in a
drawer ;—- one of the pamphlets was a Cate-
chism, another John Bull Starving^ another
Cerraldy a Fragment,

Here the witness identified his subscription
to a declaration emitted by the oanel on the
evening of the day he was apprenended.

Alexander Riddochy esq. provost of Dun-
dee, recollects receiving a letter from the
sheriff clerk of Fife, desiring him to appre-
hend George Mealmaker, on which he granted
a warrant to apprehend him. One Bell
brought the letter, and the witness has reason
to know Bell had a conversation with Meai-
maker. Mealmaker was apprehended, and
several letters found in his house, which were
also brought with him. These the witness
identified, as also two pamphlets; and the
declaration emitted by the panel when he was
.examined.

William Maekay, towh officer in Dundee,
was employed to apprehend George Meal-
.maker, which he did, and also brought a)one
with him several papers and letters, which
he, the witness, signed, in presence of the
Provost, and now knows them.

The declarations of the panel, libelled on
having been proved by the three preceding
wiuiesses, were then r^ over in open court
as follows :

At Dundee, the ninth day of November,
one thousand seven hundred and ninety-
seven years; in presence of Alexander
Riddoch, esq. Provost of Dundee ;

Compeared George Meahnaker^ weaver,
in Seagate of Dundee; who, being ex-
amined and interrogated, Declares that he
does not know any association of pertons,
either in this town of Dundee, or any other
place or part of Scotland, that goes under the
name of the Society of -United Scotsmen.

Declares that he does not know of any asso-
ciation or society, or societies under any other
name in Scotland for the purposes of reform,
or alteration of what they may consider to be
abuses of the constitntion of this country;
interrogated, whether he ever saw or has in
his custody, or knows where there are any
copy or copies of the following printed pampl>>
lets : First, a pamphlet entituled, ** Resolu-
" ttons and Constitution of the Society of
^ United Scotsmen." Second, a pamphlet
entituled, ** Moral and Political Catechism of
•« Man." Third, a pamphlet intituled, " Re-
" port from the Committee of Secrecy.**
Fourth, a pamphlet intituled, ^ John Bull
" starving to pay the Debts of the Royal Pro-
*' digal ;** and, fif^h, a pamphlet intituled,
•* Gerrald, a Fraertient." Declares, that with
respect to the first and second pamphlets,
mentioned in this question, he declines giving
any answer. With respect to the third pamph-
let, declares, that he never saw, heard, or
knows any thin^ about it With respect to
the fourth and fmh pamphlets mentioned in
this question, declares, that he has^ seen
them, but does not know if they are in hb
custody. Being interrogated, whether he is
the author or publisher of all or any of the
above five pamphlets, or knows who are the
authors or publishers of all or any of them ?
he declines answering this question. Being
interrogated, if he ever distributed any copy
or copies of all or any of the above pamphlets,
and to whom? He also refuses to answer this
question. Being interrogated, whether or not
any re(iuest was made to the declarant yester-
day, either by words or signs, or tokens, for
any printed copies of the said pamphlets, or
any other pamphlets or publications ; by
whom such requests were made, and if he
complied with tnese reauestst The declarant
also refuses to answer tnese questions. Being
interrogated, whether in any association or
society which he knows of, or of which he is
a member, there arc any signs or tokens by
which the members know one another, and
what these signs arc ? Declares, that he knows
nothing of any such matters. Declares, that
the last time he was in Cupar of Fife was in
May last, when he only passed through the
town, and did not converse or talk witn any
person in it. That on that occasion he was
attending the Synod of Relief, as commis-
sioner, irom the Relief Congregation here,
nor has he been in Cupar since the time
above declared to, or even in Fifeshire. And
declares, he was not in Fifeshire, to the best
of his remembrance, for two years preceding
that period. Declares, that he does not know
one John Aitken in Cupar, of Fife, or the
neighbourhood thereof, nor ever saw any such
person to his knowledge. Declares, that he
docs not know James Bunton, weaver ; Thos.
Anderson, ipanufacturer; David Hail, stock-
ing-weaver; William Henderson, John Loch,
and William Kirkaldy, all iu Cupar, or any of
them, or ever heard of them to the best of

11673

4md*adminUieri/ig unlawful Oaths*

A. D. 1798.

[1158

hU knowledge. And being interro^ted* if
he knew one Thomas ll*CUeisb, in EdiDbur£;b»
and ^ he bad been in the practice of corro-
apoiiding with him, what was the subject of
his correspondence with him fur these four or
five months past; and when he iast heard
from him, and on what subject? Tlie de-
clarant refuses to answer these questions re-
specting Thomas M'Cleish. And the same
questions being put to the declarant with re-
raed to James (jook, in Kirrjrmuir, declares,
tnat he does not know the said James Cook,
but refuses to answer any other of the queries
respecting him. Declares, that he is a mem-
ber of a reading society in Dundee, the pur-
pose and design of which is, that the mem-
bers contribute towards the expense of pur-
chasing books whtdbl are given out to read
wlien wanted. That the books purchased
are dvil, political, historical, and religious.
Being interrogated* where the books the de-
clarant alludes to are kept, in whose custody
they are. and who are tne other members of
this reading society? The declarant refuses
to answer these questions. Declares, that
be does not know, or ever saw, to bis know-
ledn, one William Smith, a writing-master,
in Cupar of rife. Declares that he, to the
best of his remembrance, never had nor has
be, at present, any correspondence with an^
societies in England or Ireland. And this
declaration being read over to the said George
MeiUmaker, he again declares the whole to
be truth. In witness whereof, this declara-
ti<m consisting of this and the four preceding.
pagesy writtoi by William Small, writer, in
Dundee, ia subscribed by the declarant and
the judee eiamiaator ; being emitted volun^
tary and without compulaon, place, and date
aforesaid^ before these witnesses, William
Moncrieff and William M'Kay, both town
officers in Dundee.

(Signed) Gsobge Mealmakex.

Arsx. RtaoocH, Provott

WrLLIAM MOHCRIEFF, WUntts,

William M^Kay, WUneu.

Second Deelaratian qfOeorge Mealmaker.

At Dundee, the ninth day of November, one
thousand seven hundred and ninety-
seven years; in presence of the said
Alexander Riddocb, esq.

GoKPSAaxD the before-named and designed
Creorge Mealmaker, to whom the following
wnma were produced, viz. Letter dated
SQth June, 179r, signed T. M'Cleish, with
the following part of the address only re-
maining: ** Aieainiaker, weaver, Dundee."
I^Btter, SOth July, 1797, signed T. M<Cleish.
addiened to the declarant. Letter, dated

Ediaborgh. August 10th. 1797, signed T.
M ^Cleisn, but no part of tne address remain*
hug. Letter, dated Srd Ausust, 1797, signed
T. M^leish, nartof the adoress torn off, what
ranains as follows*. ** Mr. George Meal-
y nicker, weaver, Seagate, wt a parcel/'—

Letter, dated ** Ed', Thursday evcg," signed
T. M'Cleish, and addressed to the declaraut^
Letter, dated ''Kirry, llth August, 1797,"
signed James Cook, and addressed to the de-
clarant. And the said several letters were
exhibited to the declarant,and he interrogated,
if he ever saw the same, and if he did not re-
ceive all and each of them, and if they were
not yesterday all in his custody ? He refuses
to give any answer to these aueslions, or to
sign apy note or mark upon tnem as relative
to thisdeclaration; and the said several let-
ters are marked on the back, and signed by
the judge examinator as relative hereto. In
witness whereof^ this declaration, consisting
of this and the preceding page, written by
the before designed William Small, is signed
by the declarant and the judge examinator ;
being emitted voluntarv, and without com-
pulsion, place, and date foresaid, before these
witnesses, the before-designed William MoR*
crieff and William M'Kay.

(Signed) Geoboe Mealmaker.

Alex. Riddocu, Prcwut.

William Monceiefp, WUnesi.

William M*Kay, WUmu.

The Lord Advocate declared the evidence
in proof of the libel to be concluded.

The Frocuratortfor the Panel declared that
they had no evidence to adduce in excul-
patiqn.

The Ltfrd Advocate addressed the jury and
remarked, that, notwithstanding the lateness
of the hour to which this trial had extended,
he was sure that when its importance to the
country was considered, when the magnitude
of the ofience with which the prisoner is
charged was taken into view, and the oonse-
quences of it to the British empire, then he
would not, he hoped, in tracinff the guilt
home to the panel at the bar, be thought un-
necessarily intruding on the paUence of the
Court or Jury.

His lordship observed, that it was just four
years since tnat Court and some respectable
juries had been called upon to try certain
persons for similar offences with that now
charged, sedition. These trials were of such
a nature as would not soon escape the mind
of every virtuous man, the punishments must
also be fresh in their memory ; but was it to
be supposed that after such an interval of
time an attempt should be again made to
disturb the peace and quiet of the kingdom,
and introduce fresh commotions ? It is true
as was remarked yesterday, we have not here
a British ConvenUon met in the metropolis,
bravmg the laws, adopting the terms of the
French Convention, stating itself to be the
representatives of the majority of the people
determined to call the British narliament to
account ; but if the shape is changed, it is
changed to one ten times more dangerous and
aUirming.— We must not stretch the evidence
in this or in any case, God forbid that we
should, to condemn any person brought be-

1 150] 38 GEORGE lU. Trial of George Mealmakerfor Sedition [1160

fore this Court ; but looking at the evidence
that has been adduced to-day can we believe
that any thing else was at the bottom of this
plan than fonftreason ?

Sands, a witness, made an observation to-
day, that though he once thought Mealmaker
to be the author of that pampnlet, yet from
sonic circumstances be nad now reason to
doubt that. It was stated by a younger coun-
sel Yesterday, that PalmePs was the only
similar case to this ; indeed, it must be ad-
mitted, there was a similarit^^ in that trial
with this, for Mealmaker took it upon him to
say, he was the author of that pamphlet for
which Palmer was tried. I do not now be-
lieve him, that he is the author uf that Cate-
chism so artfully drawn ; but he has indus-
triously circulated it among the poor indus-
trious people, leading them away from their
simple and innocent mode of life and busi-
ness, under the specious pretext of obtaining
a reform in parliament by petition, yet having
for his real intent that plan which Brown,
the witness, has told the Court this day made
him shiver, and which he endeavoured to per-
suade his friend from embarking in; and
Sands also admonished Mealmaker against it,
but in vain ; for though he confessed the force
of his reasoning, vet down to the period of
November when ne was apprehended, he
never ceased, as we see from the evidence, to
prove himself an arch- traitor, studying to per-
vert and corrupt every person wiuiin his
reach.

The sedition charged, must be proved either
from the panel's own conduct, his friends, or
his papers ; and here we have evidence of the
strongest nature parole, printed and real. On
the parole evidence we may refer to' Brown
and Sands. The first from the mode he took
to inform the magistrate of the county, had
incurred dancer to himself, and been threat-
ened by the friends of those incendiaries with
mischief lie stands confirmed by another, a
most unsuspicious witness, as also by written
documents. Sands tells us^ he was visited by
a i>ersou from the west country, who went to
Aberdeen and was to return in three weeks.
It is proved that similar societies were held
out as existing in England and Ireland, and
were talked of in the very meeting where
Mealmaker, with all his caution and secrecy,
was appointed a delegate. Petitioning parlia-
ment was, indeed, the ostensible pretext of
ttiose emissaries of treason ; they durst not
liold out publicly, that they meant to seize
and dispatch our magistrates ; but Sands saw
through the veil, and pointing it out with the
finger of truth to his friend Mealmaker, cau-
tioned him against it, that he suspected there
were villains at tlie bottom of the plan, and
advised him to have nothing to do with it—a
plan formed to conceal their real intentions,
until these societies were sufficiently propa-
gated through the country, when they were to
show that It was not a parliamentary reform
they bad in view, but a lotdl overthiow of the

constitution and govemment, for which they
were to substitute, at least what subsists in a
neighbouring kingdom, murder, rapine, and
all the enormities which, can disgrace human
nature.

The parole evidence is here strongly con-
firmed ny the '* Moral and Pblitical Cate-
chism." It was argued yesterday, that to
meet for petitioning parliament for a reform ,
is legal and constitutional, and that this was
the innocent purpose of these societies, but in
the whole oi these papers there is not one
word said of such an apphcation to the legis-
lature ; on the contrary, it seems studiously
avoided, but the real purpose is as phdnly dis-
cernible as if MealmaKer had told what 6vwn
had expressed, that similar scenes as those
which have prevailed in Ireland, murder and
every horrible crime, were to have been intro-
duced to' Britain. The thanks of the country
are justly due to that active and upright gen-
tleman the first maftistrate in Fife, to whose
exertions we are indebted for the c^tcction of
this formidable conspiracy. When he had by
much diligence got knowledge of -part of the
plan, and wanted to obtain another paper to
make the discovery still more complete, such
was the secrecy observed by the members of
these societies, that no such paper could be
come at in Cupar, so that it was necessarjr to
send a persons to Dundee with proper signs
and documents. These papere, nowever,
were obtained from Mealmaker himself, so
that it would be wasting time to argue upon
the point of circulation, for that is directly
and distinctly traced to him, and proves him
to be the depository of all these doctrines of
treason, which he circnlaled throueh the
country, endeavouring thus to obtain the ma-
jority he so much wanted, by exciting the
poor and the ignorant to rise agunst the rich
and higher orders of society, and thus invc^ve
the whole in one common ruin.

His lordship said, that when the gentlemen
of the jury retired, they would have an oppor-
tunity of perusing deliberately these publica-
tions. For the present, he would only quote
a few passages. Tiie first quotation stated,
that they professed themselves friends of good
order, &c. Now, said his lordship, if thev
were so, is this the time, this the period whkh
friends of good order would fix upon for en-
quiring into the defects of our government,
and raising up complaints of erievauces, when
every gooa man would ^T it his duty to
make every exertion in behalf of his country,
and in allaying discontents ? or if. they were
so conscious of rectitude, why all this secrecy,
why these signs, tests and oaths to keep con-
cealed— what? a measure which, by their
own account, is the right which every Briton
enjoys, that of inquiring into the system of
the government.

But their true aim is in another part of the
pamphlet more distinctly stated, viz. annual
parliaments and universal suffrage, and for
this they form themselves into a society of

1161]

and administering unlawful Oaths.

A. D. 1?9S.

[1162

United Scotsmen, declaring they will never
desist till they have obtained their object. In
another part they declare, the will of the mar
jortly is not rebellion. In connexion with
this, we find by the evidence, that it was their
object to brine over the majority, and then,
according to tne panel's opinion, rebellion be-
came a moral duly. All this, however, is to
be lefl to the determination of some poor
ignorant people in Cupar.

In another part of the pamphlet, it is said,
nothine is able to resist a determined people,
and alluding to government, it says, if tney
ma they are undone. Indeed we nave heard
•a evidence, that the maeistrates, &c. who
should dare to resist, should have their throats
cut, and, it is probable, that such would have
been the case whether they had resisted or
not. Upon the whole, it appears to have been
their sole motive, to overturn the government
of the country, by alienating the minds of the
people, and iiiciting them to resistance.

We all know that every man has a right to
investigate the measures of government, and
may find fault with any mmister, although
yesterday it was stated by a young gentleman,
on the other side of the bar, that such was the
intolerance of the times, that men were pre-
vented from exeicisine that right ; but does
the exercise of that rignt consist in the mea-
sures pursued by those people we are now
talking of, in oaths, and tests, and secrecy ?
can such be compared with the fair, open and
manly ntanner which has hitherto distin-
guisbied Britons? I may humbly contend that
the solittoas tendency of these societies is as
distiactly proved, as if we had looked into the
mind of Mealmaker. They were to establish
a union of rights and power, and it was, no
doubt, to establish their union of power that
all their endeavours were directed, m order to
accomplish a complete subversion of the con-
stitution. These are the sentiments of the
pamphlets issued by Mealmaker,' who was to
instruct all the delegates at Dundee, such as
Mr. Kerriemuir— Mr. Cupar Ancus.

The witness, Attken, tells us, tnaty when he
went to Dundee, he called at a public house,
and asked if there were any men there ; and,
with much difficulty, he at last told us, that
the name of the person into whose car he
whispered was Mealmaker. It may be ob-
served with what caution the panel acted,
when Bell applied to him for the pamphlets,
even when he showed the signs and proper
documents— that would not 3l do — he oe-
hovcd to take an oath, which Bell confessed
he had not taken before. In every step,
Mealmaker appears to be the ringleader.

The evidence of Tod goes to prove, that the
pamphlet was printed at M'Cleish's office,
and that a correspondence passed with Meal-
niakc r about the printing of it, and that orders
were sent by him for sending parcels of them
to di fferent parts of the country. The period
which Mealmaker took for carrying on his
plan, was that alarmiog period whien a mutiny

existed, and the British parliament found it ne-
cessary to pass an act to frustrate the intentions
of th(»e who had propagated such dangerous
plans among the sailors and soldiers in England
and Ireland. This act was to prevent unlaw-
ful oaths, yet we find that when Bell went to
Mealmaker' s house, he administered to him the
oath of secretary, because he was then to be-
come the custodier of papers, which should
be entrusted to none but those who had pre-
viously taken that oath. The administering
of this oath is most directly in the teeth of
the act of parliament; it binds the person
taking it to conceal even from magistrates the
discovery of any document in his custody. It
binds the person to obey the instructions of
a society of men surely not legally consti-
tuted. If therefore there remained any doubt
with the jury, as to the proof of the charge,
as laid at common law, surely the proof of ad-
ministering this oath, upon Bell's direct evi-
dence, is clear and distinct. It is true, a
single witness is not sufficient; but if that
witness is supported by collateral circum-
stances, these may so strengthen it as to affi)rd
sufficient validity. Can you believe all the
other parts of Bell's evidence, in which he is
supported by other witnesses, and yet reject
that part of it which applies to the taking of
this oath ? The caution of Mealmaker at ad-
ministering thn oath is remarkable ; for he
took Bdl into a closet, away even from the
presence of his wife.

His l6rdship went overevery part of the evi-
dence, and concluded, by calung upon the
jury to consider the whole of the case : that if
they thought these pamphlets were not of a
seditious tendency, or that the panel was not
the author or publisher of them, or that tho
societies were pure ana innocent in their plans
and proceedings, or that the oath said to be
admmistered to Bell is not proved, then a
verdict of acquittal will fall to be returned;
but if, on the contrary, the proof amounts to
a clear demonstration of those charges which
have been preferred, then they will return a
verdict in terras of the libel, that the panel
may receive such a punishment as may deter
others from making similar daring attempts
to overturn the happy constitution of tnis
country, which has hitherto remained the ad-
miration and wonder of surrounding nations.

Mr. Clerk, on the part of the panel, made
a very excellent reply to the lord advocate, in
which he employed much ingenuity in the
interpretation to be given to the meaning
of the different exceptionable parts of the
pamphlet, &c.

Lord Eskgrove, in the absence of lord jus-
tice clerk, summed up the evidence.

Three o'clock of iht morning of tite \SUh <f

January,

The lords commissioners of justiciary, or-
dain tile assize instantly to inclose in this
place, and to retura their verdict in the same

1 163] 38 GBORGB IIL Trial of George Mealmakerjbr SedUiaOt Sfc. [ 1 164

against the said Gtorg/6 Mealmaker, panel,
in respect thereof the said lords in terms of
an act passed in the 95th year of the reign of
his present majlesty, intituled, ** An act for.ibe
*^ more effectual transportation of felons and
*' other oflRsnders in that part of Great Britain
** called Scotland ;** order and adjudge that
the said Georae Mealmaker, pane), be trans-
ported beyond seas U> such place as his ma-

place, this day, al two o'clock aAemooD ;
continue the diet against the |9anel, and whole
other diets of court, till that time ; ordain the
baill fifteen asaserS and all concerned then to
attend, eaeh under the pains of law ; and the
]»anelin,theBieantimeto be carried back to
prison.

Curia Justiciaria S. D. N. Bens tenia in
Nova Sessionis Domo de £dinbur^,
duodecimo die Januarii, millessimo sep-
tingentesimo et nonogesimo octavo : — ^per
lionorabiles viros, Davtdem Rae de Esk-
gvove, Dominum Gulielmum Naime de
£Ninsinnan,BaroBetum,GtdielmmD Craig
de Craig,.et Davidem Smj^th de Mctbven,
Dominos Commissionarioa Justiciaria
diet. S.D.N. Regis.

Curia legiUmb affirmata.

George Mealmaker, weaver in Dundee,
prssent prisoner in the Tolbooth of Edin-*
burgh, panel.

Indicted and accused as in the preceding
sederunts.

The persons who passed upon the assise of
(he paniels) returned the following verdict.

M Edinburgh, the iUh da^
^ Jaimanf m lAc year,
1798.

The above assize having inclosed, made
choice of the said David Ilunter to be their
chaneelkMT, and of the said James Cochrane
to be their clerk, and having considered the
criminal iibei raised and pursued at the in*
stance of his majesty's advocate for his ma-
jesty's interest aninst George Mealmaker,
panel ; the intenoeutor of relevancv pro-
Bounced thereon by the Court, and the evi-
dence adduced inproof of the libel ; they all,
in one voice findf the panel George Meal-
maker guilty of the crimes libelled. In wit-
ness whereof their said ebincellor and clerk
have subscribed these presents in their
names, and by tlieir appointment, place and
date aforesaid.

(Signed) David Hvnteh, Chancellor.
Jas. Cochbave, Clerk.

The lords commissioners of justiciarv having
^nsidered the verdict of assize datedf and ro-
l^umed this 12th day of Jaauaiy current)

jestv, with the advice of his privy council
shall declare and appoint, and that for the
space of fourteen yean from and after this
(kte; with certification to him that if after
being so tmnsported, he shall return to and
be found at large within any part of Great Bri-
tain or Ireland without some lawful cause
during the said period of fourteen yean, and
be tlSreof lawfully convicted, he shall sufer
death as in caaeaet felon v, without benefit of
clergy by the law of Eneuoid; for which this
shafTbe to all cancemea a sufficient warrant;
and ordain the panel to be carried back tot
prison, therein to be detained till an oppor-
tunity' shall offer for his tmnsportation as
said 18*

(Signed) David Rai, J. P. D.

After sentence was pranouncedy the prisoner
addressed the Court in a fow woids, in sub«
stance as follow: — ''He said he thought bb
sentence havd, considering it had only been-
proved againsthimy that he had publidfcied the
Catechism, which he solemnW declared was
meraly intended as simple or abstract political
propositions* and with no view to injure the
country.— lis said, however, he saw that he
was to bd another victim to the p^irsuit of w
parliamenlary nfimn; but be could ea^jr
submitrand go to that distant eomltry, where
othsn had gone before him. Hedidnotfesrit.
Uifrwifo ami children would still be provided
for, as tfaegr had been before ; and the youag
Meahnaken would be fed hy that God who
foedstfae Mvens.— As to the Court, he had

nothing to say, but, he thought the Jiirv bad
acted very hasttlv, for if he was rightty in-,
fotmed, they bad onhr taken half an hour to
Qonsider the whole or his case. Itar knew
bast whether their conscience said tney had
done him justice; buttherewaaada|r coming,
iriien they woidd be brought before a Jury
where thm was no partial government, and
where the secrets of tne heart were known«<^^
Uebegged noirtotake his Imiveof themalL"

116S]

Proeeedmgi againsi A» Cemeranf Sgs. A. D. 1796#

[1166

628. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh,
against Angus Camebon and James M enzies for Sedi**
tion, Mobbmg, and Rioting, January 15th and 1 7th:
38 George III. a. d. 1798.

Curia Justtciaria, S. D. N. Aeg;i8y tenta in
Nova Sessionis Domo de Edinburgfay de-
cimo quinto die Jaouarii, millesimo sep-
tiogentesimo et Donogesiino octavo:--
Per hoDorabiles viros Davidem Rae de
Eskgrove, Dominum Gulielmum Nainie
de Dtinsinaan, BaroDetum, Gulielmum
Craig de Craig, et Davidem Smjth de
Metnven, Doniinos Commissionarios
Justiciaris diet. S. D. N. Regis.

Curia legiUmb aiBrmata.

Intranf

Angus Cameron, wright and architect, late
residing at Weera, parish of Weem, and
county of Perth, presently prisoner in the
Tolbooth of Edinburgh, and

Jamet Menxies^ jun. merchant in Weem
aforesaid, panels.

Indicted and accused at the instance of
Robert Dundas, esooire, of Arniston, his ma*
jesty's advocate for nis majesty's interest, for
the crimes of sedition, mobbing, and rioting,
in manner mentioned in the criminal indict-
ment raised a&ainst them thereanent ; bear-

That Albbit by the laws of this and of
every other weH-govemed realm, sedition, a^
also mobbing and noting, more especially
.with the intent and purpose of violently op-
posing and resisting a public law, and when
accoqnpanicd with acts of violence against the

C arsons entrusted with the execution of such
w, tending to deter them from the execu-
tion of their duty, are crimes of an heinous
nature, and severely punishable : Yr.T tbve
IT IS AN'D OF VBRiTT, that you ihc said Angus
Cameron and James Menzies have presumed
to commit and are guilty actors, or art and
partofeJl and each or one or other of the
aforesaid crimes, aggravated as aforesaid. In
-so FAR 4S a riotous and disorderly assemblage
of persons, having on the morning of the 4th
<lay of September, 1797, met at various places
in the parish of Dull and county of Perth,
with the avowed and determined purpose of
violenUy opposing and resisting the execution
of an act passed in the d7th year of the reign
of his present majesty George the third, cap.
103, intituled, ** An act to raise and embody
^ a MUitia Force in thai part of the Kingdom
«' of Great Britain called Scotland ;" and
having in pursuance of the said illegsi and
seditious purpose, gone to the dwelling-houses
of vartas persons in the said parish of Dull,

II

and compelled them to join and aocompanv
the said mob ; did, thereaAer, on the said 4tn
day of deptember, 1797^ or on one or other of
the days of that month, or of the month of Au-
gust immediately preceding, orofOctober im-
mediately following, proceed to Weem, parish
of Weem, and county aforesaid ; at which place
you the said Angus Cameron and James Men-
sies, with a number of others your associateti.
did wickedly and feloniously join the said
mob ; and did take an active part in all their
proceedings; and the said riotous and disor-
derly mob, among whom were you the said
Angus Cameron and James Menzies, having
surrounded the dwelling house of the rev. Mr.
James M*Diarmid, minister of Weem afore-
said, and compelled him to join them, did,
thereafter, on the said 4th day of September,
1797, or on one or other of the days of that
month, or of the month of August immedi-
ately preceding, or of October immediately
followmg, and m pursuance of their aforesaid
wicked and seditious intent, proceed to the
house of Castle Menzies, the residence of sir
John Menzies, one of the deputy lieutenants
of the county of Perth, and which is in the
immediate neighbourhood of Weem aforesaid,
and the said sir John Menzies having come
out of his said dwelling house, the said riotous
and disorderly mob, among whom were you
the said An«;us Cameron and James Menzies,
calked out, that they wanted a repeal of the
Militia act, and it having been suggested that
the said mob should return to Weem and
write out a petition stating what they wanted,
they the said persons thus riotously assembled,
fixed upon you the said Angus Cameron and
James Menzies, or one or other of you, to
write out the aforesaid petition, but you hav-
ing declined to do so, and insisted on holding
a persona] communication with sir John Men-
zies, did accordingly, with the intent and pur-
pose above libelled, bring back the foresaid
riotous and disorderly mob to Castle Menzies
aforesaid, their numbers at this time amount*
ing to upwards of one thousand, and being
mostly armed with sticks and bludgeons;
and the said persons thus riotously assembled,
among whom were you the said Ansus Ca-
meron and James Menzies, again caUed out
in the most violent and clamorous manner,
that they would have no militia, and insisted
that the said sir John Menzies should write
or sign an obligation importing, that he would
take no part in carrying the aforesaid act of
parliament into execution, and threatened that

1167] S8 GEORGE III. Proceedings against A. Cameron, Sfc. [11G8

if he did not do so, they would set fire to the
house of Castle Menzies, and carry the genUe-
inen who were there prisoners to Athol
House; but you the said Angus Cameron and
James Menzies, or one or other of you, hav-
ing thereupon proposed that the said persons
thus riotously assembled, should wait the ar-
rival of another mob composed of the Grand- 1
tiilly people, and the sua Grandtully people
havmg soon thereafter arrived along with
others, and joined the aforesaid mob, mak-
ing in all an assemblage of nersons of two
thousand and upwards, mostly armed with
bludgeons ; you the said Angus Cameron and
James Menzies or one or other of you, did,
thereafter, encourage and instigate the said
mob to insist upon sir John Menzies signing
an obligation of the tenor aforesaid. Accord-
ingly the said persons thus riotously and dis-
> orderly assembled, did, immediately or soon
thereafter, surround the person of the said
s'lr John Menzies, and by threats of imme*
diate violence, did compel him to agree to
their demands, whereupon a table navine
been brought out of the house, you the said
Angus Cameron atid James Menzies, or one
or other of you did thereafW write or cause
to be written, upon a sheet of stamped paper,
which had been procured for that purpose, an
obligation of the following import and ten-
dency, and which was dictated by you the
said Angus Cameron : *' We the following
*^ subscribers, bind and oblige ourselves as we
'< shall answer to God and man that we shall
" by every legal and constitutional means,
" adjoin our power, declare our detestation
'' and abhorrence of the late act enacted in
^ parliament, for levying a militia in Scotland.
" 'Iliat we hereby solemnly declare that we
** shall use no forcible means to apprehend,
<* confine or imprison any person assistant
'' whatever who has appeared at Castle Men-
'< zies or elsewhere, or in any part of Perth on
''prior days; further, that we shall petition
« government fur an abolition and nullifying
'' of the foresaid act from the records of'^the
'' British parliament ; that the members of
** parliament for this county, shall present
** this petition, or any annexed thereto, to the
'' two Houses of Parliament, to the privy
" council, during the prorogation of parlia-
** ment. This we shall do of our own free
*' will and accord, as we shall answer to God/'
Which paper wrote and dictated as aforesaid,
or one of a similar import and tendency, the
said riotous and seditious mob, among whom
were you the said Angus Cameron and James
Menzies did thcreai'ter compel various per-
sons then present to sign; and did further
compel various persons to take and adminis-
ter to others an oath importing, that th^y
would adhere to the obligation therein con-
tained : in particular the said riotous and se*
ditious mob, among whom were you the said
Aneus Cameron and James Menzies, who
took an active share in all the proceedings,
did time and place aforesaid, compel the said

sir John Menzies, Mr. James Stewart Fleming
of Kiliiehassie, Joseph Stewart y^nger of
Foss, William Stewart younger of Gfurth,
James M*Diarmid, minister at Weem, and
Archibald Menzies, minister of Dull, to sign
the aforesaid paper or declaration; and cud
further compel the said Mr. James Stewart
Fleming to administer an oath to the said
Messrs. Joseph and William Stewart, James
M'Diarmid and Archibald Menzies, importing
that they would adhere to the obligauon ex-
torted from the said sir John Menzies, and
signed by tliem as aforesaid ; atler all which
proceedings you the said Angus Cameron did
mount the pillar of the gate at Castle Menzies
aforesaid, and did then and there most sedi-
tiously and wickedly administer an oath to
the people thus riotously assembled, to stand
by one another in these their illegal endea-
vours, to resist the authority of the established
law of the country; further the said persons
thus riotously and disorderly assembled,
among whom wek'e you the said Angus
Cameron and James Menzies, did, on the said
4th day of September, 1797, or on one or other
of the days or that month, or of the month of
August immediately preceding, or of Ck:lol>er
immediately following, in pursuance of the
same wicked and seditious purpose of opposing
the public law of the country, procceu to the
dwelling-house of Alexander Menzies, at Bal-
fracks, parish of Fortingal and county afore-
said, carrying with them the paper or oblisa-
tion extorted and signed as aforesaid, and did
then and there compel the said Alexander
Menzies to sign the same; and William
Menzies voun^er of Balfracks having refiised
to sign the said paper, he was dragged by
the said riotous mob to sotbe distance from
bis father's house,. and was at length com-
pelled to sign the same^ but under a certain
qualification which he then added, to which,
however, you the said Angus Cameron made
some objections. Further you the said Angus
Cameron and James Menzies or one or other
of you, together with the foresaid riuiousand
disorderly mob, did, on the said 4th day of
September, 1797, proceed on towards Balle*
chin, parish of Logierut and county aforesaid^
you the said Angus Cameron riding on horse-
back before the said mob, and actmg as their
leader ; and an alarm having been given that
troops were coming np, you the said Anetu
Cameron and James Menzies or one or other
of you, did tlien most wickedly and sedi-
tiously propose, that the said mob should go to
Taymouth and break open the armory there,
and also secure some arms which the said
persons muitioned were at Glen|jron*house,
and Castle Menzies; and ^^ou the said Angus
Cameron and James Menzies, or one or other
of you, did further say that having got pos-
session of these arms, the persons thus as-
sembled and armed, need not be afraid of the
troo]|p,as they could retire to the hills in the
day, and come down and attack the soldiers at
night, thereby exciting and instigating the

1 169 J for Sedition f MobUngf and Hioting,

A. D. 1798.

[1170

«iid mob, to oppose and resist, to the utmost
of their power, any roililary force that might
be sent against them. Further you the said
Angus Cameron and James Menzies, or one
or other of you, did on the said 4th day of
September, 1797, or upon one or other of the
days of that month, or of the month of Au-
^st immediately preceding, or of October
immediately following, along with a riotous
and disorderly mob, wickedly and feloniously
surround the dwelling-houses of various other
persons in the said county of Perth, and did
compel them to sign a paper or declaration of
the tendency and import above libelled, and
did besides assault and maltreat the persons
of various individuals in the said county, and
did by force and threats compel others of
them to join the foresaid illegal and seditious
nob, and to take and administer an oath im-
porting, that they would not be in any shape
aiding or assisting in carrying the foresaid
Militia act into execution ; while others they
compelled to swear, that they would be true
and faithful to the cause in which they had
€Dgaged, meaning the illejgal and seditious
opposition to the aforesaid statute : more
particularly you the said Angus Cameron did,
along with a riotous assembly of persons on
the^aid 4th day of September, or on one or
other of the days of tnat month, or of the
month of August immediately preceding, or
of October immediately following, wickedly
and feloniously surround the dwefiin^houses
of doctor Thomas Bisset, minister of the
parish of Locierait aforesaid, and of major
Alexander M'Glashan in the parish and
county aforesaid, and did compel the said
doctor Thomas Bisset and major Alex-
ander M'Glashan to join the said riotous
and seditious assembly, and did thereafter at
Pitnacree parish' of Lo^erait and county
aforesaid, com|)el the said doctor Thomas
Bisset, and major Alexander M'Glashan to
aign a paper or declaration of the import aiid
tradency above libelled; and further did
compel the said miyor Alexander M'Glashan
to uminister an oath to the said doctor
Thomas Bisset, and to John Thomson, con-
stable at Pitnacree aforesaid, importing in
substance, that they had not been, and would
not be accessory m any shape in carrying
into execution tne aforesaid Militia act, and
vhich oath administered as aforesaid, the
said doctor Thomas Bisset and John Thorn-
sou were bv the said riotous and seditious
mob compelled to take, after all which, vou,
the said Ansus Qsmeron did wickedly and se-
ditiously airaress the said mob thus unlaw-
iuUy assembled, ana did exhort them to be
true and foithfiu to one another in the cause
ki which they had engaged, meaning their
Mtous and illegal opposition to the Militia
Sets and did thereafter most wickedly and
sedidously administer to the sud persons an
oath lo the aforesaid effect. Further, you the
said James Menzies did on the said 4th day
of September, 1707^ or oa OM or Qther 6f the
yOL. XXVI.

days of that month or of the month of August
immediately preceding, or of October immedi-
ately following, alcyig with a riotous and sedi*
tious mob, wickedly and feloniously surround
the bouse of Ballechin, parish ot Logierait,
county aforesaid, and did compel Hope
Stewart, of Ballechin, James Stewart, writer
to the signet, and captain James Spence,
to sign the paper which had been dictated as
aforesaid by you, the said Angus Cameron,
and signed at Castle-Menzies aforesud, or one
of a similar import and tendency; and, not
satisfied with this, the said riotous and sedi-
tious mob, amone whom was you, the said
James Menzies, aid violently assault the per-
son of the said Hope Stewart at the door of
his own house, and did drag him along the
sround, and did strike him several blows with
bludgeons, so that it was with difficulty he.
was rescued from their hands, and hislifo
saved. Farther, you, the said Angus Came-
ron and James Menzies, or one or other of
you, having, in the course of the months of
Aueust and September aforesaid, conspired
with certain other wicked and seditious per-
sons, to the prosecutor unknown, did endea-
vour to excite risings of the people from dif-
ferent parts of the country, in order that, hav-
ing thus brought together a numerous convo*
cation, you might carry still farther your ille-
gal opposition to the Mihtiaact, and to the
established law of the land ; and in prosecu-
tion of this wicked and seditious design, you
did, on Sunday the 10th day of September,
1797, or on one or other of the days of that
month, or of the month of August imme-
diately preceding, or of October immediately
following, go to the church-yard of Ken more,
in the county of Perth, and did there endea-
vour to excite the people to go on the nexj(
day to Fortingal, telling them that there were
sixteen thousand men to meet there, to op-
pose the Militia act; and did endeavour, by
all the means in your power, to excite the
people to attend this wicked and seditious as-
sembly ; and you did in particular say to them,
that those who did not go willingly, would be
forced : and farther, in prosecution of the said
wicked design, you did go to Kinlochrannoch,
in the county of Perth, upon the evening of
the said 10th of September, and did there in-
form divers people; that there was to be a
meeting on the next day, and did utter many
wicked and seditious speeches, tending to ex-
cite the people to attend a tumultuous assem-
bly as aforesaid ; thus endeavourinz, as far as
it lay in your power, to procure an illegal and
seditious convocation of the lieges, in opposi-
tion to the public law of the country. And
you, the said Angus Cameron, having been
apprehended and carried before ArchU>ald
Campbell, esquire, of Clathick, sheriff depute
of Perthshire, did, on the 14th and 15th days
of September, 1797, in his presence, emit
and sign two separate declarations : and you,
the said James Menzies, having been appre-
hended on the 14th day of Septemb^, 1797^
4F

JrlTJJ' S8 GEORGE HI. Proceedings agauiU A. Camion, t(9. [llTtr

and having been carried befgre the said Ar-
chibald Campbell, esquire, did, in his pre-
sence, emit and si^nlwo declarations dated
the said 14th day ot September and year fore-
said; as also a third declaration, dated the
Kith day of the said month of September and
yiear foresaid. All which declarations, toge-
t^r with a paper, dated at Easthaugh, of
Dalshain, 5th Septeinberi 1797, will be used
ID evidence against you, the said Angus Ca-
meron and James Menzies respectively, and
vtll for that purpose he lodged with the clerk
of the High Court of Justiciary, before which
you are to be tried, that you may have an op-
portunity of seeing the same : at least, tiroes
dud places above libelled, the aforesaid riot-
ous and seditious proceedings took place—
the aforesaid seditious speeches were spoken—
the aforesaid illegal and seditious attempts
isade to excite farther mobs and risings of the
people ; and you, the said Angus Cameron
and James Menzies, or one or other of you,
are guilty actors, or art and part, of all and
each, or one or other, of the foresaid crimes.
AlL; which, or part thereof, being found
proven by the verdict of an assize before the
lord justice general, lord justice clerk, and
lords commissioners of justiciary, you, the
said Angus Cameron and James Menzies,
ought to be punished with the pains of law,
to deter others from committing the like
crimes in all time coming.

(Signed) John Burnett, A. D.

The indictment bcine read over to the
panels in open court, and they being severallv
interrogated thereupon, they both answered,

NOT GUILTY.

ProeurtUart far ths Proueutor, — Robert
Hundas, esq. of Arniston, bis Miyesty's Ad-
vocate; Mr. Robert Blair, Advocate, his Ma-
jesty's Solicitor General; and Mr. James Os-
wald, Advocate.

Proeuratorgfar the Panel, Angus Cameron. —
Mr. John Clerk, Advocate.
. Fbr the Panel, James Menties. — Mr. James
Fergusson, Advocate; and Mr. James Gra-
biam, Advocate.

Parties' procurators having been fully heard
upon the relevancy of the indictment,

. The lords commissioners of justiciary hav-
ing considered the crimhial indictment,
raised and pursued at the instance of his
majesty's advocate for his majesty's in-
terest, against Angus Cameron and James
Menzies, panels; they find the indict-
ment relevant to infer the pains of law ;
bnt allow the panels, and each of thenit
to prove all facts and circumstances that
may tend to exculpate them, or either of
them, or alleviate their guilt; and remit
the panels with tlie indictment, as found
relevant to the knowledge of an assize.
(Signed) Da v. Rae, J. P. D.

• The lords commissioners of justiciary con-
' Unu» tlie diet agamsi the panels, and

whole other diets of court, UU Wedoetdaj-
next, at eleven o'clock forenoon, in thia
place, and ordain parties, witnessed as-
sizers, and all concerned, then to attend,.
each under the pains oi law ; and ordain
the panels, in the mean time, to be car*
ricd to the Tolbooth of £dinbur|;h.
(Signed) Dav. Ra£, J. P. D.

Curia Justioiaria S. D. N. Regis tentainKoil^
Sessionis Domo de Edmburgh^ decimoi
septimo die Januarii, millessiaio septin*
gentesimo et uonogesimo octavo: — per.
honorabiles viros Davidem Rae de £sk-
grove, Dominum Gulielmum Nairnede.
UunsinnanBaroneUim, Gulielmuni Craig
de Craig, et Davidem Smyth de Metjf
ven, Dominos Commissionarios Justiciar.
t]ss. dicti S. D. N. Regis.

Curia legitime affirmata.
Intran^

James Menzies, junior, merchant In Weem^
parish of Weero, and count v of Perth, present*
prisoner in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, panel.

Indicted and accused as in the preceding
sederunt. But Angus Cameron, who was in-
dicted along with the said James Mensieiu
jun., and who entered the panel and plesdea
to the indictment at last sederunt, being oA'
times called in court and three times at the>
door of the court-house, by a macer of €oitct».
as use is, he failed to appear.

Whereupon his nmesty's advocate reprs-
sented, that the said Angus Cameron, aftei
being recommitted at last sederunt, bad ap-.
plied * to one of their lordships nunsber, bjT;

* ** The application was made to a singin
<' judge, and was no doubt complied with, but
** whether under the notion that the act
'< compelled him to grant such relief^ or ia
'^ the exercise of his own discreUon, does not
'f appear. This case, however, aobrds tisn
" strongest illustration of the inexpedaeoqj n(F
" grantmg bail in suoh circumstances* Co*
** meron had been chared as the rin(g^eader
** of a formidable mob, m order to oppose the
'< execution of the militia law. At first, he
** was apprehended on a charee of high tren-
" son, but was afterwards indicted for mob*
'* bing and rioting. He had offered bail, but
" the security not being sufficient, it was re-
<< jected. His trial then came on, when he
<< pleaded net guilty:* a long debate todc
*^ place on the relevancy, on which an intei^
** locutor was pronounced, and further pro-
^'ceedines adjourned till the second day
*< thereafter. On the intermediate day, or the
** evening of the day on which his trial wae
** adjourned, he sgain applied for bail, found
** sufficient surety, was admitted to bail, and
*' thereafter absconded. This was the case
'' which more immediately led. to the passing
" of the act of the 39th Geo. 3, cap, 49.^^
Burnett on the Criminal lMwqfSeotlami,5»»

1173} >r StdHum, Mobbing, and Rioiing. A. D. 1796.

triT*

pctitiody wad was admitted to bail ; and hav-
ing found caution upon the evenrog of that
4^, was liberated from prison ; and, it would
aeediy taking guilt to himself, has absconded.
He» therefore, was under the necessity of
oaoTiog their lordships to pronounce sentence
-of fugitation against the said Angus Cameron,
«iid to dedare the bund of caution granted for
his appearance forfeited.

The lords commissioners of Justiciary de-
cern and adjudge the said Angus Cameron to
4>e an outlaw and fugitive from his majesty^'s
tews; and ordam him to be put to his high-
nesses horn, and all his moveable goods and
-fieur to be escheat and inbrought to his ma-
jesty's use, for his contempt and disobedience
in not appearing this day and place in the
•fabtir of cause, to have underlyen the law for
ifab crimes of sedition, mobbing, and rioting in
•atanier mentioned in the crimmal indictment
.nised against him thereanent, as he who was
lawfoUy cited to that effect oft' times called in
eourty and three times at the door of the
ctmrtrbouse, and failing to anpearas said is :
ftnd fbrther the said laws declare the bond of
cinition granted fmr the appearance of the said
.Angns Cabneron to be forfeited ; and orduin
the penalty therein contained to be recovered
by the clerk of this court, to be disposed of as
the court shall direct.

(Signed) Da v. Rae, J. P. D.

Thereafter bis majesty^s advocate rcpre-
'Slented that he meant to use every exertion in
his power to have the said Angus Cameron
apprehended and brought to trial, along with
the panel James Menzics, for the very heinous
offences with which he stood charged; for
which purpose the strictest search would be
vursuea in this country, and in England and
Ireland. That he was unwilling to proceed
against Menzies till the result of these searches

«« This statute" [39 Geo. 3, c. 49] " was
^ pifsed a short time after the various trials

* that had taken place in Scotland for this
"oflfetice" [sedition], " betwixt the years
^ 179S and 1799, and particularly after the
^ riots at passing the militia law; and its pro-
^ fetsed oDJect was to cure an evil which was
** then felt, and which would in all similar
^ eatfes have been felt — the persons accused
"** Immediately obtaining, by contributions
^ amon^ their associates, the full amount of
^ the bail then exigible, to enable them to
^ abscond and evade a trial. This plan had
** been sucoessfiilly followed by Camertmy the
" rin^Mder of a formidable mob or rather
^ hMUmction in the county of Perth, in op-
^ posttkin to the execution of the militia law ;
^ ihd it #18 his case that more Immediately

* led to the passing the statute of the 89th of
** the kmg.*'— J6id. 34§. See on the subject
'•f the stsit 39, G. S, Mr. Hume's observa-
4iD»CSoiiMi.Tr. forCr.vol. 1, pp.148 et seq,

^ft tikif Burnett 846 ^ idf . and Appendix,

should be known ; and as a very roateritl
witness in the trial could not be brought ii^
from indisposition, he was upon the whole
induced to move their lordships to desert ttie
diet against the panel, James Menzies, pra
loco et tempore.

The lords commissioners of justiciarv, in
respect of what is before represented, de-
sert the diet against the panel James
Menzies pro loco ct tempore,

(Signed) Dav. Rae, J. P. D.

[Menzies uras re-committed on a new war-
rant, and afterwards admitted to bail.

No farther proceedings appear on the re-
cord against either Cameron or Menzies.]

The following are the declarations of Ca-
meron and Menxies of September 14th and
IMh, 1797.

At Perth the 14th day of
September, 1797 yean.

In presence of Archibald Campbell, esa. of
Clathick, advocate, sheriff depute of the snire
of Perth, compeared Aninis (Cameron, Wright
and architect, and residing in the house of
Mrs. Menzies in Weem, and James Menzies,
jun. residing in Weem, and being examined,
declare that they were this morning appre-
hended at Mrs. Menzies' house in Weem, by
virtue of a warrant granted bv Mr. James
Chalmers, sheriff substitute of the shire of
Perth ; that some time after they were ap-
prehended, Mr. Chalmers came to Mrs. Men-
zies* house, and seized sundry papers which
he found there, and put them up into two
bags, which he sealed, and which bags so
sealed they now see upon the table; and the
said bags being openeo by the sheriff in their

{>resence, a number of the papers therein
laving no reference to the crime for which
they were apprehended, and which midit be
of use to the declarants or their friends, for
carrying on their business, were returned to
them ; but nine letters, two songs, a draught
or copy of a letter, and some jottings, all be-
longing to the said Angus Cameron, were
kept and sealed up in a paper signed by
Angus Cameron, and of this date.

(Signed) Anous Camebon.

J AS. Menzies, jun.
Ar. Campbell.

Follows declaration of Angus Cameron,
15lh September, 1797.

At Perth, the 15th Sept. 1797 years.

In presence of Archibald Campbell, esq. of
Clathick, advocate, sheriff depute of Perth-
shire, compeared Angus Cameron, wright and
architect, and residing at the house of Mrs.
Menzies in Weem ; who being examined,
declares, That on Sunday, the 3rd of Septem-
ber, he went to hear sermon at Dull, and
af\er the aflernoon sermon, he saw a crowd
at the Cross of Dull, and understood, on in-
quiry, that some persons were employed to

1 175] 38 GEORGE III. Proctedingt agaitut A. Cameron, 8[c.

[1176

put up a printed explanation of the Militia act
by the duke of Athol, at the church of Dull,
but were prevented by the crowd from doing
so during the time of divine service ; the de-
clarant was also informed, that some persons
who had gone to Kenmore and Fortingall
after being at Dull to put up the explanation
at these two places, had been prevented by
the crowd from putting it up either at Ken-
more or Fortingall. Declares that he asked
at Dull what the paper was ; and on a roan of
the name of Adam Menzies in sir John Men-
zies' ground at Appin of Dull, giving the de-
clarant the paper which he said be had found
in the porch of the church; the declarant
read it to the crowd around, and observed
the explanation was necessary for such as had
not read the act, but not for those who had
read it; and declares, that be himself had
read the abstract of it in the Edinburgh
Courant before that time, and he understood
that by the act no militia-roan could go out of
Scotland, except he was drafted into a reei-
xnent in Scotland at the time ; but the de-
clarant did not inform others that such was
his idea of the act. Declares, that prior to
this time there had been a meeting of the
peonle of the parish of Logierait, who had laid
hola of Fleming, a society schoolmaster, who
had been employed to make up the list at
Logierait; there had likewise been next a
meeting of people at Dull, about the middle
of August, who took both the schoolmaster
and minister of Dull into custody ; and the
declarant saw the people at Aberfeldy on their
return from this meeting; after this there
was a meeting at Kenmore where the people
took hold of the session books as the de-
clarant was informed. Declares, that after
this there was a meeting in Fortingall, in
Glenlyon, where the session books of Fortin-
gall were taken hold of, and the school-
master taken, bound not to act; all of which
meetings were prior to the second meetins of
the Srd of September at Dull. Declares, that
the declarant had no knowledge of these
meetings at the time they took pUce, nor was
concerned in promoting them. Declares,
that on Sunday night, or early on the Monday
morning of the 4tn of September, the people
of Foss and of the parish of Dull, or from that

auarter, bad coUected and forced along with
lem Mr. Joseph Stewart of Foss, Mr. Stewart
younger of Gairth, Mr. Menzies, minister of
Dull; Macgregor, session clerk of Dull ; Mr.
Menzies, factor for sir John, and his son Mr.
Kobert Menzies, writer to the Signet, or these
sentLemeh came with the crowd, and also Mr.
M^iarmid, minister of Weem; that the
crowd came to the declarant's house, and he
went with them, they having first threatened
to force him to go, and the declarant having
judged it prudent to say, he would go of his
own accord. That the crowd, consisting of
about two thousand, went from Weem to
Castle-Mcnzies, and sent in sir John's factor,
that sir John might come out^ and that a peti-

tion to the king might be prepared* That
after some time a petition was wrote by John
Robertson, session clerk at Weem, to whom
the declarant dictated the terms, but in doing
so only translated from the Gaelic what the
people around desired to be put down, and
which was communicated first to sir John for
his approbation ; that the petition begun in
this way, '* We the folio wmg subscnoers,''
and bound them to present a petition to the
king and parliament in a legal and constitu-
tional manner, and to the privy council during
the prorogation of parliament for the abolition
of the Militia act ; and declares, tliat sir John
corrected the spelling of a word in the peti-
tion ; that the paper further contained an obr
ligatbn on the subscribers, that they were not
to use any means for apprehending any of the
petitioners or subscribers. Declares, that
many of the people also insisted that the
paper should contam an obligation on sir John,
and the subscribers not to bring an^ militaiy
force into the country; but to this the de-
clarant and others objected as being an obli»
gation sir John could not fulfil, and on a
show of hands, and by the voice of the people,
it was determined that this should not be in-
serted. Declares, that this petition was sub-
scribed by sir John and the gentlemen pre-
sent, but not by any of the common people,
nor by the declarant, who it was resolved
should subscribe a petition to be annexed to
this paper, leaving this paper to be subscribe^
by the gentlemen only out of respect to them.
Declares, that when the crowd came down to
the gate, they came to a resolution to protect
themselves and their masters, and sir John in
particular, from any illegal violence ; and the
cause of coming to this resolution was, that
they were afraid the Athollers would attack
sir John : that several persons, and aroongt
others, the declarant asked the people if such
was their resolution, which they declared it
was, by holding up their hands ; but the de-
clarant did not then administer any oath to
any person present, nor was any oath adror-
nistered. Declares, that a(\er this the de-
clarant and the men, who might be about four
thousand in number, proceeded to Balfinax.
where Mr. Menzies of Balfrax signed the

Kaper on Uie outside of his own house, and
is son, doctor Menzies, was taken down to the
river-side, which is about a gun-shot from the
house, or went there, where he refused to sign
the petition, except under ibis <|ualification,
that he should be allowed to act, if called on
to do so, as an officer in his majesty's service ;
that some of the crowd revised to agree to
this, but the declarant informed them, thai to
compel an officer to act so, was treason as
well as sedition, and doctor Menzies was then
allowed to sign with that qualification. De-
clares, that some of the crowd had Insisted
that doctor Menzies should be obliged to swear
as well as sign, and declares, tnat the mi-
nisters of Dull and Weem had been made to
take an oath at Castie-Menzies^ tt^t they

1 177J Jw Sedition^ MMing, and Rioting.

A. D. 1798.

tllTS

would act agreeably to what was contained in
the paper they signed. Declares, that the
people then proceeded to Mr. Stewart of
Blackhills in one detachment, and another
detachment went on towards Ballechin, with
which last party the declarant was ; that the
party which went to Blackhill got Mr.
Stewart's subscription to the paper, and also
^t Mr. Stewart of Clochfoldich's subscript
'tion to the paper. Declares, that the declarant
having got his horse from James Menzies ;
wentonoefore the Ballechin party, and on
the road met with a crowd of people he had
not seen before, or heard of from Logierait,
who took the declarant with them to the
house of doctor Bisset, minister of Logierait,
it being then dark, and. past nine at night;
and the doctor was brought out of his house,
or came out of it, with a view to proceed to
Ballechin. Declares, that others of this Lo*

fierait party went to the house of major
I'Glashan, and brought him towards Balle-
chin : that when the Logierait party and the
declarant returned into the road they had left,
they found that the people from Castle-Men-
zies, inchidine the party who had been at
Blackhill, and were returning from thence
when the declarant and the Logierait party
met them. Declares, that as there had been
irregularities at Ballechin committed by the
crowd, there major M'Glasban and doctor
Bisset were not carried to Ballechin, but to a
farm-house near Ballechin, where major
BI'Glashan signed the paper on the same con-
dition as doctor Menzies had done, and doctor
Bisset also signed the paper, but the declarant
does not recollect that at this time doctor
Bisset took any oath, and he is positive that
he did not desire major M'Glashan to take the-
ductor*s oath ; that doctor Bisset produced a
parish list which was delivered up to some of
the people ; that at this time Thomson, a con-
stable, was made to swear about papers, major
M'Glashan having taken his oath at the desire
of some of doctor Bisset's parishioners, and
wi ibout the declarant's interfering. Declares,
tbatheofiTcred his horse to doctor Bisset, which
the doctor declined to take ; that the declarant
was within hearing when the oath was ad-
ministered to doctor Bisset. Declares, that
after this, the declarant and the people pro-
ceeded to Weero, it being then about two
o'clock on Tuesday morning, and went a
little way beyond Weem on their road to
Glenlyon, but afterwards resolved to delay
going there till Monday, the llth of Sep-
tember, and the declarant told them to meet
in parties of forty-nine, if they were to as-
semble so as they might act legally and con-
stitutionally, into parties of which number
the declarant had aesired them to divide at
Castle- Menzies on the morning of the 4th,
and it was intended to proceed to doctor
C>ampbeli of Glenlyon, to get a warrant
or sanction from him to meet or petition to
the number of forty- nine at a time, in case
thai iibould be necessary. Declares^ that the

declar^t remained at his ordinary work till
Sunday the 10th, except a part of a day oa
which he was at a wedding, and on Sunday
he went to hear sermon at Kenmore, where
he expected to meet two sawyers he had ia
employment at Rannoch; that, after sermon at
Kenmore, he had a conversation with the peo«
pie there about the Militia act, and the legality
of petitioning, and the declarant told them it
was lawful to petition to the number of forty-
nine at a time, provided doctor Campbell of
Glenlyon or Mr. Stewart of Gairtb, presided
at such a meeting. Declares, that after this
he went to Rannoch in hopes of meeting his
sawyers, who had not come to Kenmore, and
to inquire about some timber he had there,
which he had been told was in danger of
being floated down the river; and to the
persons there who asked him about meetings
to petition, he answered, that he heard there
was to be a meeting at Fortin^ll, in Glen-
lyon, on Monday the llth. That the de-
clarant remained in Rannoch on Sunday
night, and came home on Monday at three
o'clock and remained there and about his
ordinary work 'till he was apprehended on
the Thursday morning by captain Colberg^
and a party of the Windsor forresters, though
he had received notice he was to be appre-
hended. Declares, that on Monday the 4thy
and Tuesday the 5th, he saw no person forced
to go along with the crowd, but all went of
their own accord. Declares, that many of
the crowd had sticks in their hands, but no
other weapons. Declares, that in the morn-
ing of the 4th, that the declarant was one
of those who went for Mr. M'Diarmid, but
did not go into the house. Declares, that no
other paper as far as the declarant ever
knew, except the one at Castle-Menzies,
was ever made out, but he has heard
murmurs, but no resolution actually formed
about reduciug the ministers' stipends, the
schoolmasters' salaries, and the lairds' rents,
and he never heard an3r proposal about the
king being obliged to reside at Edinburgh, or
about the excisemen not being allowed to
go above a mile from their own houses.
Declares, that he never saw or heard of any
scroll of an act of parliament in the name of
him the said Angus Cameron, or any other
person. Declares, that he never heard of
any proposal to seize arms in the gentle-
men's houses, but, that he once heard of a
proposal in case the French should invade
the north coast of Scotland and attack Tay-
mouth,of tlie people defending; the cannon at
Taymouth, and using them for the defence
of Taymouth. Declares, that no resolution
was formed to oppose the military, as this was
not thought necessary, as sir John Menzie$
and the other gentlemen had signed the
paper. Declares, that no offer was made
from his part of the country to the people of
Athol to assist them, but he has heara such
offers were made from the low country
about Blairgowrie. Declares, that op the

1179] S8 GEORGE III. Proceedings agamst D. Black and J. PateAan [1180

mornmg of Tuesday, the 5th, it was proposed
by some of the crowd to take the gentlemen
tbey had with them to Blair, but the decla-
nnt objected to this as did others, because
the duke had ao power to graut their desire.
Declares, that when in Glasgow he was a
ynember of none of the societies of the
Friends of the People, nor of any other
club except the Gaelic speaking club, which
had nothmg to do with politics. Declares,
that about a fortnight or three weeks ago, he
aaw Mr. Winlack, hatter in Perth, in the
house of John M'Naughton, inn-keeper in
Aberfeldy, where the conversation was about
religion m general, but as far as he recol-
lects not about Paine's Age of Reason, which
pamphlet the deelaront has read, as well as
the answer to it Declares, that after the
declarant bad got the fpeople at Castle-Men-
laes divided into parties of fortv-nine, so as
they might act legally, the declarant having
refused to act in any public capacity unless
the people acted constitutionally. Sir John's
&ctor and the other gentlemen by calling off
their tenants, and by desiring the whole
people not to form into parties of forty-nine,

grevented this arrangement from being ad-
ered to ; upon which the declarant tokl the
people he would not act at all unless com-
pelled, as the people were not now adhering
to the law when in larger parlies than forty-
Dine. Declares, that sir John Menzies
wishing there should be a spokesman fur the
whole, at 6rst James Menzles in Tullychrui,
who goes by the name of the East Indian,
was brought forward by the people, but he
being not liked by them on hearing him, they
iforced the declarant to come forward as their
•pokesman. Declares, that the declarant

knew nothing of the meeting of the 4th of
September, tul the people came to his hous^
and forced him with them. Declares, that
at the time he was apprehended, several of
his papers were seized and were sealed up by
Mr. James Chalmers, sheriff substitute of
Perthshire and sent to Perth, which papers
were last night in his presence examined by
the judge examinator, and the folk>wing pa-
pers taken therefrom and put up again and
sealed, viz. nine letters, two sonp, a draught
or copy of a letter, and some jottings, ami
these papers being of this date marked
and subscribed by the declarant and judge
examinator, as relative to this declaration
were again sealed up by the sheriff; of whieil
papers those marked No. 1 and S, are of the
declarant's band-writing, and the paper
marked No. 9, upon examining it narrowly
he rather thinks b not of his hand-writia^ ft
least he does not recollect of having wntten
such a paper, nor does he know of whose
hand-writing it is. The declaration contained
upon this and the nine preceding pages, in-
cluding one marginal note on the 9nd page,
two marginal notes on the 5th page, twt
marginal notes on the 7 th page, ana one mar-
ginal note on the 8th page, was read over to
and adhered to by him in preseuce of Wil-
liam Ross, writer in Perth, James Patoo^
sheriff clerk of Perthshire, and Peter De-
seret, writer in Perth and writer hereof, five
words on the fifth page being deleted before
signing.

(Signed) Akgus Camerokt.
Ar. Campbsli..
William Ross, WUnitu.
James Paton, WUneu,
Petck Deseret, WUneu^

629. Proceedings before the Circuit Court of Justiciary holdcD
at Perth, against David Black and James Pateiuson,
for Sedition and administering unlawful Oaths^ Sept. 20th:
38 George III. a. d. 1798.

Curia Itineris Justiciarii S. D. N. Regis tenta
in Prastorio Burgi de Perth, vicesimo die
mensis Septembris, anno Domini milies-
ntno septtnpenlcsimo et nonogesiino oc-
tavo, per honorabiles viros Joannem
Swinton de Swinton et Dominum
Oulieimum Nairne de Dunsinnan, Ba-
ronetum, duos ex Commissionariis Jus-
ticiarift dicti S. D. N. Regis.

Curia legitime aifirmata.

XHERB were produced criminal letters at
the instance of his majesty's advocate against
David Black, weaver, in Baffiesbrae, and
Jam«^ Paterson, weaver in ground of Petten-
crie^ bolb in the parish of Dunfermline and
Muitjrof Fife, for the crime of sedition, in

manner therein specified^ which criminal liliel
bears,

That where, by the laws of this, and of
every other well^governed realm. Sedition is
a crime of an heinous nature-and severely pu-
nishable ; and whereas by an act passed in
the 37 th year of our reign, cap. I'^S, intituled,
•* An Act for more effectually preventing the
administering or taking of unlawful Oaths,^it
is inter ttiia^ statuted and ordained, ** That
*' any person or persons who shall in any
*^ mander or form whatsoever, administer or
'* cause to be administered, or be aiding or
'* assisting at, or present at, and consenting to
^ the adibinist^rmg or taking of any oath or
** engagement pur^^rting or intended to bind
** the person tidiing the same to engage ik

11^1] Jor Sedition and administering unla\:oful Oaths. A. D. 179S*

[I18f

'* aoy mutinous or seditious purpose; or to
*^ disturb the public peace; or to be of any
'' associatioD, society, or confedefacy, formed
'* for any such purpose ; or to obey the orders
** or commands of any committee or body of
** meo not lawfully constituted ; or of any
" leader or commander, or other person not
*' liaving authority by law for tiiat purpose :
f' or not to inform or give evidence against
** any associate, confederate, or other person ;
** or not to reveal or discover any unlawful
^ combination or confederacv ; or not to re-
** veal or discover any illeaal act done or to
*i be done ; or not to reveal or discover any
** illegal oath or engagement which may have
'< been aidministered or tendered to or taken
** by such person or persons, or to or by
** any other person or persons, or the import
** of any such oath or engagement, shall, on
^ contiction thereof by due course of law, be
*^ adjudeed guilty of felony, and may be trans-
'' ported for any term of years not exceeding
** seven years; and every person who shall
''take any such oath -or engagement, not
^ being compelled thereto, shall, on convic-
" tion thereof, by due course of law, be ad-
** judged euilty of felony, and may be trans-
^ ported fur any term of years not exceeding
"seven years:" Yet true it is and of
VERITY, That the said David Black and
James Paierson above complained upon,
^e both, or one or other of them guilty
actors, or art and part of all and each, or
one or other of the foresaid crimes : In so
frr as, in the course of the years 1796 and
1797, & number of seditious and evil disposed
persons did, in different parts of Scotland,
and particularly in the county of Fife^ form
^mselves into a secret and illegal association,
denominated '' The Society of United Scots*
men,*' the object and purpose of which was,
under pretext of reform, and of obtaining
anntml parliaments and universal suffrage, to
create in the minds of the people a spirit of
dialoyalty to us and disaffection to the estab-
lished government, and ultimately to excite
Ihem to acta of violence and opposition to the
laws and constitution of this country; and
tahicb unlawful and seditious association, the
nore effectually to obtain its object, was sy»>
tanuUically formed upon rules and regula-
tions artfully adapted to the wicked purposes
U. had in view, such a& the formation of small
clubs or societies in various parts of the coun-
try, with officers belonging to each, such as
president, secretary, and treasurer ; the sub-
division of these clubs or societies, when the
number of individuals composing them
aiDOunted to sixteen into other clubs under
similar rendations; the formation of commit-
tees called parochial, county, provincial, and
national; tne nomination of delegates from
each society and committee to attend the
hisher. committees; the election (by what is
called) the National Committee of a Secret
Committee consisting of seven members;
tfajtrpatribiiting of small sua^ to^ defifiy. the

expense of delegates ; tiie establishing of signs^
and countersigns, and of private words, tho
better to conceal, as well as to promote tho
association ; and lastly, the administering, of*
oaths to those who were admitted member^
binding them to persevere in endeavpurinff
to obtain the objects of the association, an4
in defending to their utmost, those who might
be prosecuted for their concern in such dan*,
gerous conspiracy ; and above all, binding
them to declare in the most solemn manneo
by what is called a test of secrecy, '* Thai
" neither hopes, fears, rewards or punish-.
<' ments, shoidd ever induce them, directly oc
" indirectly, to inform on or give any evideoc^
" aj^inst any member or members of this, or.
" similar societies fur any act or expression
" of theirs done or made, collectively or ifidi<i
<< vidually, in or out of this society in pur*
'' suauce of the spirit of this obligation,'' oM
which dangerous and seditious asseciatiooy
formed upon the principles above described^
the said David Black and James Paterson^
are active and distinguished members, ami
did in the course of the year 1797,themselvQ9
take at Dunfermline aforesaid, the different
oaths, or obligations, the import and tendencjp
of which have been now libelled; and did
further on one or other of the days of tiw
mouths of August, September, or Ociobeii
1797, also at Dunfermline aforesaid, or a*
Golfdrum, in the said parish of Dunfermline^
administer the same to others; and further^
did on all occasions not only in the said townr
of Dunfermline, but in other places in that
neighbourhood, wickedly and feloniousl]^
exert their utmost endeavours to promote tho
objects and purposes of the foresaid seditious
and dangerous association, taking every op«
portunity of attending meetings ot the turbu*
lent and disaffected ; and in those meetinga
by inveighing aeainst the government and
constitution of the country, doing all that in
them lay to excite and increase a spirit of
discontent, and ultimately of resistance to
the established authorities. Ann moes paa-*
TtcuLARLY, the Said David Black and Jamer
Peterson did frequent and attend varioiia
meetings of this description, held in the bouto
of John Nicol, ale-scIler in Dunfermline, oi
of Isobel Moutry, his widow, also ale-seUee
there, — as also in the house of James Wilson^
wright at Golfdrum, parish of Dunfermline^
and county of Fife, and of Andrew Rutber*
ford, at Golfdrum aforesaid, during tho
course of the months of November and Do*'
cember, 1797. As also of January, February,
March, A pril. May, and .J une 1 798 ; at mao^
of which meetings the pamphlets^ intitulodl
" Paine's Rights of Man, and Age of Boom
<< son,'' with other flagitious and innaminatoqi
publications were produced, read^ and an*
proved of; and the seditious and treasonablo
doctrines, they contained, were recommended!
and enforced by the said David Black and
James Paterson: and further, the** {the said
DavidiBlack-aad. J|UBfi6.PalenoB, did. motf

1 183] 38 GEORGE IIL Proceedings againH D. Black and J. Paters&n [1 184;

wickedly and feloniously attempt to seduce
from his duty and allegiance Henry Keys or
Kees, soldier in the West Lowland fencible
regiment, inveigling him to attend said sedi-
tious meetiugs, Dotn in the houses of James
Wilson and Andrew Rutherford above-
mentioned, during the months of May and
June last 1798, and then and there attempting
by inflammatory harangues, to prevail on him
to join their said wicked association ; and to
turn his arms against his king and country ;
and further at many of these meetings
thus held in the houses of John Nicol, Isobcl
Moutry, his widow, James Wilson, and Aq-
drew Rutherford, the said David Black and
James Paterson did most traitorously express
regret at the success of our arms, and sorrow
for any bad fortune with which those of the
French were attended ; and had the audacity
to vindicate the unnatural rebellion which
has broke out in Ireland, and to represent the
Irish insurgents as people groaning under
oppression, and struggling in defence of their
just rights : and further, the said James Pa-
terson above complained upon, did on one or
ether of the days of August, September, or
October last, 1797, within the house of the
said James Wilson, at Golfdnim aforesaid,
wickedly and feloniously admit him a mem-
ber of the above described seditious associa-
tion, and did then and there administer to
bim the oath above described, and did also
communicate to him the private signs by
which he might make himself known to the
other united Scotsmen, members of this dan-
gerous association ; and the said David Black
did within the house of the said James WiU
•on at Golfdnim aforesaid, on one or other of
the days of August, September, October, or
November last 1797, wickedly and feloniously
admit James Henderson, weaver in the ground
of Pittencrieff, a member of the said seditious
society of United Scotsmen, and did then
and there administer the oaths of said society
to him, and gave him a pamphlet intituledf,
" Resolutions and Constitution of the Society
''of United Scotsmen,'' and likewise commu-
nicated to him the private sign, by which
he might make himself known to other
members of that dangerous association. And
the said David Black having been appre-
hended and brought before James Moodie,
esq. one of the sheriff substitutes for the
county of Fife, did at Dunfermline on the
11th of June last in his presence emit a de-
claration: and the said James Paterson having
been brought before the' said James Moodie,
esq. at Dunfermline, on the said 1 1th of
June, did then and there, in his presence also
emit a declaration. And both which decla-
ntions, as tending to show the guilt of the
laid David Black and James Paterson in the

Cemises, together with the paper or pamph-
t intituled, ** Resolutions and Constitution
'^ of the Society of United ScoUmen," being
to be used in evidence against them upon
^ir trial, will for that porpoie in due tune

be lodged in the hands of the clerk of the
circuit court of justiciary, before which they
are to be tried, that they may have an
opportunity of seeing the same. At least
times and places above libelled, the aforesaid
acts of sedition were committed, and the said
oaths or obligations were administered as
above mentioned, and the said David Black
and James Paterson above complained upon,
are both or one or other of them guilty actors,
or art and part of all and each or one or other
of said crimes. Ai^l which, or part thereof
being found proven by the verdict of an
assize before our lord justice j^neral, lord
justice clerk and lords commissioners of jus-
ticiary in a circuit court of justiciary, to be
holden by them or any one or more of their
number within the criminal court house of
I'erth, upon the ^Oth da^ of September next
to come, the sakl David Black and James
Paterson, above complained upon, ought to
be punished with the pains of law, to deter
others from committing the like crimes in
all time coming.

Declaration of David Black libelled oji.

Compeared David Black, weaver in Buf-
fiesbrae in the ground of Pittencrieff, who,
being examined, Declares, that he is not in
the knowledge of any society existing in this
country of the denomination of United Scots*
men at present, but adds, that some time in
the course of last summer, he was sent for to
speak to a person in the house of James
Hetlie, ale-seller in Dunfermline, but upon
his calling at Hetlie's house, found the mad
was gone ; that thereafter another menage
came forliim to eo to the house of widow
Nicol, likewise ale-seller in Dunfermline,
and upon his calling at that house, he wa»
shown into a room, where he found a stranger
whom he had never seen before, and James
Ritchie, weaver in Dunfermline, since de^
ceased. That this stranger was about five
feet six inches high, a broad stout man/
brown hair and brown beard, pf a hxr com-^
plexion, had on a mixed coloured coat, and
coarse worsted stockings, and from his ap-
pearance he imagined he might be about
forty years of age. That the stranger aud
he was bom in Scotland, but the declarant
supposes he was an Irishman ; Declares, that
the stranger refused either to tell his name,
or of what profession he was, and that he has-
never seen or heard any account of him »noe.
That at this time the stranger took the de-
clarant into a room by himself, and ^ve him
a slip of paper, upon which was pnnted an
oath, which ne thinks was of the same nature
with one now shown him, which is contained
in a pamphlet intituled, " Resolutions and Con-
" stitution of the Society of United Scotsmen,**
viz. The oath called the '^ Test for Members**
on the seventh paee, and is marked with bia
initials as relative hereto. That the stranger
did not administer the oath in any other way
than by desinng the declarant tn lead k^m

1 185] Jw Sediim and admMuiering unkinful Oaihs. A. D. 1798.

[U80

Ooea not now recollect whether he read it aloud
or not. That they then returned to the room
where they had left Ritchie, where they had
a bottle of ale and a dram. That in the
course of the conversation the declarant un-
derstood that the stranger had come from the
west country, and intended going to the
north. That the stranger said it was a diffi-
cult matter to deal wiUi people of contrary
dispositions, and that he was therefore
obliged to give them their own way, as some
of theni had refused to take his test: that
the stranger said as he had only one copy of'
the oath with him, he should write out a
copy, and leave it with James Ritchie ere he
Jctt town ; the declarant likewise saw the
stranger give James Ritchie a direction to
some person in Glasgow, who would furnish
him with what intelnsence or instruction he
wanted, relative to the society. Declares,
that he never was at any meetings of the
society but twice; that both these meetings
were held in the house of widow Nicol, when
there was present David Anderson, late
weaver in Dunfermline, now in Glasgow; the
said James Henderson, journeyman weavers,
with the said James Ritchie ; that at last
meeting, which was about the end of harvest,
and before the business was discovered at
Cupar, James Ritchie made a verbal report;
that to the best of his recollection, the report
was rather unfavourable as to the state of
the society ; as they were beginning to find
that thev had been misled b^ some persons
from Ireland, who were the original founders
of the society of United Scotsmen. That
this society to which the declarant belonged,
gave over their metings in consequence of
their observing from the news- papers that a

Cerson had been hanged in Irelana, who had
een convicted of administering unlawful
oaths; being interrogated, whether he ever
administered any of these oaths of admission
Into the society of United Scotsmen to any
person. Declares, that ^he never adminis-
tered the oath to any person except one
of the name of James Henderson, weaver
in the ground of Pittencrieff ; that this hap-
pened in the house of James Wilson, wrigbt
at Golfdrum ; that he does not remem-
ber the precise time when it was done,
but that It was prior to the meeting when
Ritchie made bis report as formerly men-
tioned. Being interrogated, whether he
knows that James Paterson, weaver, in the
ground of Pittencrieff, is a member of the
society of United Scotsmen, declares he does
not know. - Declares, that he has been pre-
sent with one Henry Keys, a private in the
West Lowland Fencible regiment, lately
quartered in Dunfermline, that there were
some other persons present whose names he
does not recollect. That in the course of
eonversatidh. Keys said, that at the time the
militia 'were balloted for, if any inob or
tumult had taken place upon the occasion, and
had the regiment been called out and ordered

VOL, XXVL

I to fire, he would have been damned before
I he would have hurt one of them, meanins
I the mob. That at the time he administered
the oath to James Henderson, he the de^
clarant gave him a pamphlet containing re-
solutions and articles of the society's consti-
tution, which Henderson read over, and being
shown a pamphlet, intituled " Resolutions
" and Constitution of the Society of United
^ Scotsmen,'' declares, it was one of the
same kind which he gave Henderson to read
over, and the copy now shown him is marked
by him the declarant, as relative hereto, upon
that'seventh page thereof. Declares, that at
that time he likewise communicated to Hen-
derson a sign by which he could make him-
self known to any other members of the
society, and that the sign was by putting a

Kin in the left sleeve 'of the coat with the
ead downwards, in the same wa^ that the
tailors put their needles into their sleeves.
Declares, that he the declarant received the
copy of the resolutions and constitution of
the society from James Ritchie, who got a
number of them sent him from Glasgow by
the carrier, which Ritchie distributed to him
and the other members of the society, all
which the declarant declares to be truth,
one word in the twenty-first, and four words
in the twenty-second line of the sixth page of
this declaration delete before signing. And
in testimony of the truth of what is before
stated, the declarant has subscribed each
page, consisting of this and the preceding
seven pages, place and date before men^
tioned, before and in presence of the witnesses
following, viz. Messrs. Robert Hutton and
David Stenhouse, both writers in Dun-
fermline.

(Signed) David Black.

James MooDia«
Robert Huttov, Witness,
David Stehhouss, Witness,

Declaraium of James Paterson libelled on.

James Paterson, weaver, in the ground of
Pittencrieff, being brought before the said
James Moodie, esquire, ^ce and date fore-
said; and being interrogated whether heknows
two young men lately enliated with the artil-
lery of the names of John Paterson and

Inglis, who are both by trade weavers ; de-
clares that according to his recollection he
never was in company with either of them.
Declares that he nas heard that such a so-
ciety existed, as that of th^ United Scotsmen*
but does not know that any of these two lads
were members of that society, except from re-
port; declares that he never was a member
of the said society. Being shown a pamphlet
intiluled *< Resolutions and Constitution of
the Society of United Scotsmen," and interro-
gated whether he had ever before seen any
copy of it: declares that he remembers to
have received one from James Ritchie, late
weaver in Dunfermline, now deceased, who
requested of him to become a member, nut h»

4 G

1 187] S8 OeORG£ IIL Froutdingt against D. Blath and J. PaU^wn \\VS6

refused to take the oaths, although ho doe# t
not noi^ recollect whether he might have
giveh Ritchie a promise of Mcres^ or not:
declares that he received some signs from
Ritchie, by which he might make himself
known to the other members; that he
does not now recollect particularly what these
signs were, but thinks that one of them was
by clasping the hands together, by intersect-
ing the fingers, and another by putting a pin
into the sleeve of the coat in a certain posi-
tion. Being interrogated whether he ever ad-
mitted any members into the society, de-
dares that about twelve months ago, he read
over the regulations contained in the pam-
phlet above referred to, to James Wilson,
Wright at Golfdrum, and thereafter gave him
the pamphlet, that he might read over the
oaths himself, whom he at the same time told
it was expected he would keep it a profound
secret. That the declarant at that time lik^
wise communicated to Wilson the signs given
him by Ritchie, and by which he, Wilson,
might make himself known to the other mem-
bers of the society. Interrogate whether he
knows of any other persons who are members
of the society of United Scotsmen, declares
that from a conversation he had with Inglis,
the recruit in the artillery, when one day in
bis, the declarant's shop, he had reason to be-
lieve that Inelis was a member, but cannot
Sy whether raterson the recruit was a roem-
irornot; declares, that he believes David
Black, weaver at BuffieVbrae is a member of
said society ; and his reason for thinking so
IS, that David Black has given him the usual
signs to that effect. Being interrogated whe-
ther he kiiovrs one William Craig, a packman,
who was lately committed upon a charge of
some seditious practices, declares, that he
docs not know Craig, but understands that he
was in town last week or the week before ; all
which he declares to-be truth : In testimony
whereofhe has subscribed each page of this
declaration, consisting of this and the three
preceding pages, along with the said James
Hoodie, before these witnesses, Robert Hut-
ton and David Stdnhouse, both writers in
Dunfermline.
(Si|;Bed) Jambs Patersou

jAMSa MOODIB.

RoBBftT HUTTON, WUnfti,

David Stenroc SB, Witmn.

The said David Black being called upon to
compear and underlye the law for the foresaid
crime ; and failing to compear,

The lords Swtnton and Dunsinnan, decern,
a^udge, and declare the said David Blftck
to be an outlaw and fugitive from his ma-
jesty's laws; and ordain him to be put to tif6
horn, and all his moveable igoods and gear
to be escheat and inbrought to his majesty's
use, for his not compearing this time and

E lace, in the hour uf cause, to underlye the
LW for the crime of bedition, specified in the
criminal letUrs raised against him thereanent,

he being htwfiilly summoned M thai aflcct,-
called in court, and at the door of the ounrV
house, and failed to appear; and the said lordff
declare the bail-bond gfSAted for bis appear-
ance forfeited f and ordi^n the penalty to bt»
paid to the clerk of this circuit-court, to be
applied as the court of justiciary shall direct.
(Signed) Johh Swimtok^ P.

Jame$ TatenoHj weaver, in jroond of Pit-
tencrieff, in the parish of Dunftnuline, panel.

Indicted and accused at the instance of hia
majesty's advocate, for his majesty's interest*
of the crime of sedition, as specified in the
criminal libel raised and pursued against him
thereanent, before recorded.

The libel being read over, the panel pled
Not Guilty.

Procuratort for the Protecitfor.— The Advo-
cate Depute ; Mr. Joseph M*Cormick, adviK
cate.

Froeuratorsforthe Panel, — ^Mr. John Clerk,
and Mr. John Hagart, advocates.

The lords Swinton and Dunsinnan, having
considered the libel against the said James
Paterson, panel, fiud the same relevant to in-
fer the pains of law : But allow the panel a
proof or all facts and circumstances that may
tend to exculpate him, or alleviate hiseuUt^
and remit the panel with the libel as found
relevant to the knowledge of an assize.

(Signed) John Swxntoh, P.

The following persons were named on th»
assize of the panel, viz.

Francii Al'^a6 of M^Nab.

Hope Stewart of Ballechan.

CharUt Campbell of Lochdochart.

Bobert Stewart of Clochfoldich.

James Stewart of Derculich.

Jamee Inclietf merchant in Dunkeld.

Char lei Husband, writer in Perth.

William Graham, merchant in Perth.

James Cniikshank of Langley-park.

Dffvii/L3^e//ofGallry.

Hercules Ross of Rossie.

David Carnegie of Craigo.

Robert Ouehterlonv in Montrosa.

Thomas Erskine of Cambo.

James Cheape of Strathtymm.

Who were all lawfully sworn, ind 'no ol^cc-

tion made.

The advocate depute adduced the fdliowiog
witnesses:

1. William Smith, writing-master in^ Nttw«
town of Cupar.

S. John Aitken, weaver in Newtown of do*
par.

, 5, Walter Brawn cleaper and blaaoher im
Cupar.

[This witntss beinc a quaker, his aolcam
affirmation insteaa of his oath was taken.]

4. James Wilson, wright at GolfSram near
DimfemHine.

i |S9] fir SmUium and admbuilering mddtisfid Oatki. A. D. 17d8. [1 190

to be their chancellory a9d (he said Charles
Husband, writer iu Perth, to 'be their clerk,
and having considered the criminal libel rieiised
and pursued at the instance of bis majesty's

5. Robert Huttan, writer in Dunfermline.

0. James Moodie, sheriff substitute of the
county of Fife.

)[tht dedaratioQ of the {wtiel libelled on be-
' ing proved by the two preceding witnesses,
was read.]

7. Dofoid Guild, weaver at Golfdrum afore-
said.

6. Henry "Keyt loldier in the West Lowland
Feocibk ref^ment.

9. Andrew Rutherford^ weaver at Golfdrum
^foresaid.

10. DovtrflTa/i!!, weaver at GolfdmrnaforQ-
■aid.

11. GAM^eBtfft, manu^turerbackoftbe
Dam, Dunrermline.

The advocate depute concluded his proof.

The procurators for the panel adduced the
following witnesses;

1. Andrew Rutherford, weaver in Golf-
dium.

S. Jamei Reid, weaver there.

3. John Dryulalef weaver at Baldridge-
bum.

The 'procurators for the panel concluded
their proof.

The advocate depute summed up the evi-
dence for the prosecutor, and Mr. Clerk ad-
dressed the jury on the part of the panel.
. Lord Swiaton charged the jury.

The jury returned the following verdict :

At Perth, the SOth day
of September, 1798 years.

Hie above assize having inclosed, made
4±toice of the said Hope Stewart of BaUechan,

advocate for his majesty's interest, against
James Paterson, panel, the interlncutorof re-
levancy pronounced thereon by the Court, the
evidence adduced in proof of^^the libel, and
evidence in exculpation, they, by a plurality
of voices, find the sud James Paterson guilty
of sedition at common law; and thev all in
one voice find the other charge libelled against
the nanel, under the act of 37th of George the
thiru, not proven. In witness whereof their
said chancellor and derk have subscribed
these presents in their names, and by their ap-
pointment, place and date foresaid.

(Signed) Hope Stuart, Chancellor.
Chakles Husband, Clerk.

The lords Swinton and Dunsinnan, in re^
spect of the verdict returned against the said
James Paterson, panel ; in terms of an act
passed in the S5tn ^ear of the reign of his
present majesty, intituled, *^ An Act for tho
more effectual Transportation of Felons and
other Offenders in that part of Great Britain
called Scotland ;'' order and adjudge, that the
said James Paterson be transported beyond
seas, to such place as his majesty, with advice
of his privy council, shall declare and appoint ;
and that for the space of five yews firom this
date, with certification to him that if, after
being so transported, he shall during the fore*>
said space, be found at large, in any part of
Great Britain, without some lawful cause, he
shall suffer death ; and grant warrant for de*
tainine him in the tolb^h of Perth, till de*
livered over for transportation.

(Signed)

John 8wivtoiI| R

1191] 38 GEORGE III. Trial of O' Caigli/, 0' Connor and othm [IIW

630. Proceedings on the Trials of James O'Coigly, otherwise
called James Quigley, otherwise called James John
FrvEY, Arthur O'Connor, Esq., John Binns,* John
Allen, and Jeremiah Leary, on an Indictment, charg-
ing them with High Treason: tried before the Court
holden under a Special Commission at Maidstone in Kent,
on Monday the 21st and Tuesday the 22nd days of May:
38 George III. a. d. 1798.t

On the 28lh of Febniaiy, 1798, the pri-
coners were apprehended at Margate.

On the 6th of March the prisoners were
committed to the Tower, by warrant from his
grace the duke of Portland, one of his ma-
jesty's principal secretaries of state, on a
charge of high treason.

On the 19th of March a special commission
of Oyer and Terminer issued under the great
seal of Great Britain, to enquire of certain'
high treasons and misprisions of treason com-
mitted within the county of Kent, and a
special commission of gaol delivery as to all
persons who were or should be in custody for
such offences on or before the lOtb of April
followrag.

• On the 7th of April the prisoners were re-
moved by Habeas Corpora from the Tower
. to the county gaol at Maidstone.
^ On the 10th of April, the special commis-
sioos were opened at the Sessions-house at
Maidstone— Presen^ the right' honourable
lord Romney, lord lieutenant of the county ;
the honourable sir Francis Buller, baronet;
and the honourable John Heath, esq. two of
the justices of his majesty's court of Common-
pleas, afler which the Court adjourned to the
next morning.

On the nth of April the Court met, pur-
suant to adjournment; the sheriff delivered
in the panel of the grand jury, which was
called over, when the following gentlemen
were sworn :

The Grand Jvry.

Sir Edward Knatchbull, hart.
Sir John Gregory Shaw, bart.
Sir John Dixon Dyke, bart.
Sir William Geary, bart.
Charles Townsend, esq.
Henry Oxendon, esq.
AVilliam Hammond, esq.
George ^Ihill, esq.
Nicholas RoundellToke, esq.
Lewis Gage, the younger, esq.

* See his trial for uttering seditious words
p. 596 of this volume,
t Taken HI bhort hand by Joseph Gurney.

Edward Austen, esq.

George Grote, esq.

Georg^e Children, esq.

Francis Motley Austen, esq.

Edward Hussey, esq.

John Larkin, esq.

Thomas Brett, esq.

Edward Peach, esq*

Henry Woodgate, esq.

William Francis Woodgate, esq.

James Chapman, esq.

George Smith, esq.

George Talbot Hatley Foote, esq.

Mr. Justice Buller, — Gentlemen of the
Grand Jury; — As we are convened hece under
a commission which his majesty has been
pleased to direct for a special purpose, and
not in the ordinary course of an assize, it may
naturally be expected that I should sav some-
thing on the occasion of our being tnus as-
sembled. To enable me to do that, I' have
no guide but the commissions which I bear,
for no depositions are returned here according
to the universal practice of an assize. Pro-
bably that has ansen /rom the circumstance
that indictments for treason are usually pre-
pared by the immediate officers of the crown,
and not by the officers of this court. In many
cases a different practice might be useful, be-
cause it is as material in treason as it is in
felony, that the Court should be enabled to
point out to a grand jury the leading features
of the cases which are submitted to their con-
sideration, and the circumstances to which it
is most essential for them to apply their at-
tention, when they consider the effect and
bearing of the evidence which may be brought
before them.

At present I know not any of the circum-
stances which are likely to be adduced upainst
the prisoners, and therefore I can only mivcr
to you the law in general terms, as I find it
laid down in our books, with the hope that
some observations or other may be of assist-
ance to you in the inquiries which you will
have to make. If they should be found not
to be applicable to tne cases brought before
you, and any questions should arise on which

UM]

JijT High Treason.

A. D. 1?98.

[1194

you may be desirous of obtaining information,
the Court will at all times be i;eady to give
you every assistance in their power.
' From the commissions we learn that our
enquiries are to be confined to the crimes of
high treason and misprision of treason. It
was the happiness of this country for a con-
siderable series of years to be almost a stran^r
to the crime of treason, until the new prm-
ciples and opinions which have been adopted
in France unfortunately misled the minds of
many unthinking people, and also furnished
the discontented in this country with what
they thought the probable means of subvert-
ing our existing laws and constitution, and
introducing the system of anarchy and confu-
sion which has fatally prevailed there.
Powerful as these opinions have been in their
effect in France, they cannot make way«witb
the considerate part of this countrjr; because
they would destroy a constitution, under
"which experience has shown that men may
live happily if they . please, and they would
establish nothing m its room which can se-
cure the freedom, the liberty, or the property
of the members of the community.

In our present state we have no danger to
fear from the power of the supreme magis-
trate : he must on all occasions act by the ad-
vice or intervention of others, -who can de-
rive no authority from him which the laws do
not sanction, and who are responsible for the
advice they may afford, and punishable for
the evil counsel they may give. No law can
•here.be made to which the legislature them-
selves will not be equally liable with every
other subject; and no better security can be
devised against oppressive laws, than the cer-
tainty that if they be so, their mAkers will
suffer by them.

' There is not in this country one rule by
which the rich are governed, and another for
the poor. No roan has justice meted out to
him by a different measure on account of his
rank or fortune, from what would be done if
he were destitute of both. Every invasion of
property is judged of by the same rule ; every
injury is compensated m the same way ; and
everv crime is restrained by the same punish-
ment, be the condition of the offender what
it may. It is in this alone that true equality
can exist in society. - Different decrees are
necessary for every government ; ana greater
talents and industry will in the course of things
give one man a superiority over another; and
without some distinction- and rank, the ma-

fistrate would want authority ; virtue would
c without one of its ' strongest incentives;
and the prudent and industrious would remain
on a footing with the idle and the dissipated.
If this be a fair description of the advan-
tages of our constitution, it may be thousht
impossible that any number of persons in this
country should wish to adopt any other form
of govern ment. Bu t i t is the observation of a
"vcrjr wise man,* that ** he who goeth about

* Lord Bacon.

to persuade a multitude that they are not so
well governed as they ought to be, shallaever
want attentive and favourable hearers, because
they know the manifold- defects whereunto
every kind of regimen is subject; but the
secret lets and oiiBculties which in public
proceedings are innumerable and inevitabie^
they have not ordinarily the judgment to
consider."
Among the unthinking and those who.do
>t take a comprehensive view of the subject
much mischief may be done by artful an<

not take a comprehensive view of the subject.

bv artful and
designing men, who ageravate the defects of

one constitution, and dwell only on the ad«
vantages of others, and notwithstanding the
imperfections of human wisdom, requiring
unerring conduct from their governors, im-
puting every mischief of chance to ill design
and corruption ; and as a correction of aU
those' evils, thev teach the |)eople that the
government ougnt to be in their hands. Thej
whom this latter argument may allium, would
do well to consider whether any change of
government can really better the condition of
the body qf the people. The actual exercise
of power must, from its nature, be vested in a
few ; it may shiA, where there is no monar-
chy, from the hands of one contending party
to. those of another; but the mass of the
people must remain as they are, employed at
the plough, the anvil, the loom, or in some
occupation which will atiford a maintenance
and support. There is nothing which prevents
men of abilities equal to great situations* from
obtaining in this countnr the highest offices
and honours, of which the instances are nu-
merous in every department.

But as no state can gratify the ambition
and views of every one, who may feel his
fortune wearine - away, think his merit neg-
lected, or his ftilities employed on suljects
below tfiem; men of this description will
look for times of trouble and confusion, as
iUflfording them opportunities which in the
re^lar course of settled government cannot
arise ; when thev may obtain in a day what
no length of labour could have procured
without the assistance of chance ; wnen thev
may rise to sudden elevation by the downfiul
of others; and when from the eeneral misery
of their country, they may by possibility
advance their own private interest. To guard
against the machinations of such restless and
turbulent spirits, the common law, and the
statute law of the land Have made various
provisions, at the head of which the code of
criminal law relating to high treason is to be
found.

High treason by the old law of the land is
saidtooonsistin the imagination of the heart;
but our ancestors wisely provided that no
man should be tried for secret intentions'Only^
and that any crime, of which he was accused^
should not only be manifested by overt acts,
but that' such* overt acts- should be charged
in the indictment, in order that the supposed
offender migkf be apprized of the nature of

/

1195} 38 GSQRGB lU. Trial qfO'Caigfyf 0*Cofmor and athm {119^

complete on his wt, though H had not the
efiect he intended; in other words the send-
ing, catriying or removing money^ or intelli-
gence for the purpose mentioned is an owed
act, which marks and indicates the traitorous
imagination of the heart.

In treason, all concerned are prindpals.
Where many are acting together in the same
traitorous (lesignsy the act of each in pucsuanos
of that design, b the act of the others^ and
all are equally guilty. Many acts in their
nature can only be committed by the hand of
one, but still .they are rightly considered as
the acts of all, who are pnvy and consenting
to the design ; and men's being in the mae
company when the design is in agitation, is a
great evidence of their knowledge and consent.

Indictments for high treason generally run
to a oonsiderddle length ; for first they state
the kind of treason which is imputed to the
prisoner, and then they state the several £uts
done by the prisoner, which are intended to
be established by evidence as proofs of the
treason which is charged. Those are called
overt acts, and are the most material for the
attention of a jury. Though many such acts
are charged in an indictment^ yet if any one
is satisUctorily nroved, that is sufficient te
convict the o£fenaer.

The statutes to which I alluded arc, first,
an act of the thirty-third year of the present
kins's reien, chapter the thirty- seventh, in-
tituled, M Act more dfeetuaUv to prevent,
during tie present War between Great Britain
and France, all traititrout correepondence witkf
or aid or atmtanee being given to, hie Mqfe$fy'e
Enemiein By that statute, amongst other
things, it is enacted, that if anv person shouki
procure, for the purpose of bemg sent into
France, any arms, stores, bills, gold or silver
coin, or other articles therein-mentioned,
without licence of the king or council, he
shall be deemed a traitor, and suffer death as
sucl^ except it be under different circum-
stances, which can hardly app^ to any case
that can be brought before you.

The effect of that statute seems to me to
be only to make the obtaining money ao4
goods for the purpose of being sent into
France, though never sent there, adistina
and positive treaaon, instead of being an overt
act only of treason, as it was before the passing
of that statute.

The other stattUe is an act made in the
thirty-^ixth year of the rdgn of his present
majesty, bv which it is enacted, ** that if any
person ihaJl compass, imagine, or intend the
death or destruction, or any bodily ham
tending to death or destruction, maiminfc or
wouD^mg, imprisonment or restraint ottkm

Eerson of the kins;, or to deprive or depose
im firom the style, honour, or kingly name
of the imperial crown of this realm, or of any
other of his nuyesty's dominions or countrio^
or to levy war against the king within thia
realm^ in order by force or constraint to oon^
pel him to change his ineasures or eounse]% •

|he case intended to be proved against him,
and be prepared to give it such an answer as
the tiulh would admit This is one of the
various instances in which oqpr Ibrefiithers
have been lealous to found a constitution
arbich might preserve to their posterity the
safety of toeir lives, and the security of their
Jibertie% provided only that they kept them-
selves within the bounds of law common to
nil, and made fiMr the benefit of all.

Of tbe daffeFont kinds of treason which are
comprMed within the statute of the S5 Edward
Urd, I presume it will suffice for every puqx»e
of the present inquiry to select these twa
First, the compassing or imagining the death
of the king; andf, secondly, adhering to the
king[s«aeroies, fiving them aid and comfort
vithin the realm or without. I will also
t^e some notice of two very modem statutes^
vhioh msgr or siay not be found applicable to
these cases.

Besides tbe msser cases of an immediate
attack on the kiue's person, with a view to
deprive him of fife, there are many others
which have been holdea at all times to be
overt acts of compassi^ and imagining his
death. Omepiring against the king's life, —
sending letters to invite other persons to
peovide weapons to effectuate hu death, —
meeting and ooissukiBg, or printing treason-
able positionfl^ to prove that the people ought
to take the government into their own hands,
pr any other acts which have a manifest ten-
dency to endanger his person, are overt acts
|o prove the compassine of his death. — And
no thisjgfound it has been determined that
concerting with fgieigners or others to procui«
an invasion of the kingdom, jgoing abroad for
that purpose, or even intending so to do, and
taking any steps in prder thereto, are overt
acts of compassing, the king's death. The
mere taking boat in order to go on board a
vessel with inlention to go to France for the
purpose of persuading the French to invade
this kingdom, has been solemnly determined
to be a sufficient overt act These points
have been long decided by judges eminentiy
friendly to the principles of the Revolution,
and the liber^ of the subject, among whom
was lord chief justice Holt, who was as
sound a lawyer as most who ever presided
in Westminster-hall, «nd who bore a con-
siderable part in bringmg about the revohition
Itself.

Under the head of adhering to the kioffs
wamies» tt might be sufficient to say ttet,
nny net by which it is intended to strengthen
<the enemy, and to weaken the king's mmds,
•is adhering lo the king's enemies. The bare
fending, or conveying money, provisions, or
intelligence^ in order to be conveyed to the
thoti^ the money or injtdiligence
to be intercepted, and never gets to
Is of the enemy, has also been deter-
mined to be an act of treason. The reason
assifaed for whieb is, that the party in send-
mgJtdidaUbe fould, and the treami was

IWTI

Jhir High Treatott,

A. D. 1798;

rit96

Or in order to put any force or constraint
upon, or intimidate or overawe both Houses,
or either House of Parliament, or to move or
dtir any foreigner or stranger with force to
invade this realm, or any other of his majesty's
dominions, or countries, under the obeisance
of his majesty, and shall express the same by
publishing anv printing, or writing, or by any
overt act, or deed, every such person shall be
deemed a traitor."

Whether this statute be merely an affirm-
ance of the common law, or whether, like the
former one, it makes those acts specific trea-
sons which before were onlv overt actn of
treason, is at this moment at least immaterial
to discuss. Even if in any instance it has
made that treason which was not so previous
to the act, yet the principle of the bill has
followed up what was the law before; and if
there were a possibility of doubt what the law
was before this statute, or the meanest capa*
city was not likely to comprehend it, the le-
gislature undoubted! V acted wisely and hu-
manely in making the law so plain, that no
man could help understanding it

I am not aware that there is anv commit-
ment for misprision of treason, and therefore
I shall not aetain you by any discussion of
that offence.

Gentlemen, if these observations should in
any degree tend to afford you reliefer informa-
tion in the course of your inguiries, the end
and object of them will be fully answered*
and if they do not, I hope I have not occupiea
any inordinate portion of your time.

On the same day the grand jury returned a
true bill against James O'Coigly, otherwise
called James Quigley, otherwise called James
John Fivey; Artnur O'Connor, esq., John
Binns, John Allen, and Jeremiah Leary, for
high treason.

On the 19tb of April the Court nset pur-
iuant to adjournment— The prisoners were
tet to the bar.

Mr. Justice BulUr informed the prisoners
an indictment had been found against them
for high treason, and that copies of that in*
dictment would soon be delivered to them ;
that the Court proposed to adjourn to the 30th
instant, when they would be arraigned, and
their trials would probably be brought on the
next day.

Mr. &Cmnor stated that from the close con-
finement in which be had been kept, he had
not had an opportunity of learning whether
there would be anything informal in his ap-
plytng to have his trial put otf ; that not yet
KDowinff what was the charce against him^
he coula not tell whether it might qpt be ne-
eessary for him to send to Iceland for some
witnesses: but requested information from
the Cbiirt

Mr. Justice^ BulUr said that it would not
Ite informal, if he could make out a proper
ea»e fbriti but advised him not to rely impli-
citly upon it

At the -request of the several prisoners, Mr*
Gumey was assigned by the Court of counsel
for John Binns, Mr. Fei^son of counsel for
John Allen, and Mr. Scott of eounsel for Je^
remiah Leary.

The Attorney General moved that the she^
riff be required to deliver to Mr. White,
the solicitor for the treasury, who is to prose*
cute for the crown, a list of the persons re-
turned to serve on the jury, which was ac-
cordingly directed.

On the 17th of April, Mr. White, solicitof
for the Treasury, caused to be delivered to
each of the prisoners a copy of the caption
and indictment, a list of the petit jurors re^
turned by the sheriff, and a list of the wit-
nesses to be produced by the crown for prov^
ing the said indictment

On the 28lh of April, at the request of the
prisoners, Mr. Plumer was assigned of counsel
tor James CCoigly and Arthur O'Connor, and
Mr. Dallas of counsel for all the prisoners*

SeuionS'hauie, Maidstone. Monday, Aprii
30th, 1798.

[The Court met pursuant to adjournment.]

Pretent.—The ri^lit hon. lord Romney ; the
hon. sir Francis Buller, hart., and the hon.
John Heath, esq. ; two of the justices of
his majesty's Cfourt of Common Pleas«
The hon. sir Soulden Lawrence, knt, one
of the iiistices of his roaiesty's Court of
King's-bench ; and Samuel Shepherd, esq;
one of his majesty's Serjeants at law.

James CCoi^ley, otherwise called James
Quigly, otherwise called James John Fivey,
Arthur O'Connor, esq.; John Binns, John
Allen, and Jeremiah Leary, were set to the
bar.

The Counsel for the Prtionerf stated that
there were several variations in the copies of
the indictment which had been delivered to
the prisoners, but at the same time mentioned
that they made 4he objection with a view to
postpone the trial.

The following affidavits being put into
court,, and the attorney general consentine
to* the trials being postponed till the 21st or
Mav, the counsel for the defendants waved
their objections, and the prisoners were im-
mediately arraigned upon the indictment, to;
which they severally pleaded not guilty.

Kent to an/.— The king against Janler
O'Coigley, otherwise called James Quigley{
otherwise called James John Fivey, Arthur
O'Connor, esq., John Binns, John Allerf; and
Jeremiah Lear^.

James O'Coigly, sued by the several names
above-mentioned, and the above-named
Arthur O'Connor, John Binns, John Allen,
and Jeremiah Leary, all now prisoners in the
gaol at Maidstone, in the county of Kent;

J 199] 38 GBORGE III. Trial of&Coigly, O'Connor and others (1200

tlie sud indictment aod list -of witnessses
they respectively consulted their said soli-
citors relative to the seeding a proper person
to Ireland for the purpose of procuring the
attendance of the said witnesses on th^r re-
spective bebalfs upon the trial of this indict-
ment.

And this deponent John Simmons for him-
self saith, that he sent a copy of the said in-
dictment and list of witnesses to London in
the morning of the t8th da^ of April instant,
for the consideration and advice of Thomas
Plumer and Robert Dallas, esqrs. the counsel
intended to be assigned for the said Arthur
O'Connor and James Coigley ; and that the
said John Foulkes, another of the above-
named deponents arrived at Maidstone on
the night of the said 18th instant, and infoniw
ed this deponent tiiat the said counsel, so as
aforesaid intended to be assigned for the said
Arthur O'C^onnor and James Coigley, were of
opinion that the attendance of the said wit-
nesses on behalf of the said Arthur 0*Connor
and James Coigley respectively was material
and necessary ; and this deponent farther saith,
that in consequence thereof, he this deponent
did 00 the morning of the lOth day of April
instant, obtain from the said Arthur O'Connor
the addresses of the said several witnesses on
his behalf, with instructions to send imme-
diately to Ireland for the purpose of procuring
their.attendance on his behalf at the said trial,
and that he delivered tlie said address and in-
structions to the said John Foulkes to be for-
warded by a proper person to Ireland.

And this deponent John Foulkes for himself
saith, that he did on the morning of the said
19th day of April instant, obtain from the said
James Coigley the addresses of the said wit-
nesses to be produced on bis behalf, with in-
structions to send the same by the person in-
tended to be employed by or on the behalf of
the said Arthur O'Connor to Ireland, to pro-
cure their attendance on bis behalf on the
said trial ; and that he this deponent did on
the same- day receive from the said John Sim-
mons the addresses of the said witnesses of
the said Arthur O'Connor, with the said ia-
structions of the said Arthur O'Connoi relat-
ing thereto.

And this deponent farther saith, that he
inuned lately delivered the said several ad-
dresses and instructions so received by hioi
from the said James Coigly and jT>hn Sim-
mons respectively, to John Augustus Bonney
another of the said deponents, to betaken im*
mediately by bim to London, and to be for-
warded from thence without delay by a pro-
per person to Ireland, for the purposes afore-
said.

. And the said John Augustus Bonoey for
himself saith, that he did set out by the first
coach that went from Maidstone after be re-
ceived tbp said addresses and instructions, atul
arrived in London about nine of the clock io
the evening of the said 19th instant ; and that
this deponent on the morning of theMlh in^

John Simmons, of Rochester, in the county
of Kent, solicitor for the said Arthur O'Connor
and Jeremiah Leary; John Augustus Bou-
ncy,* of Percy-street, in the parish of St.
Pancras^ in the county of Middlesex, solicitor
for the said John Binns and John Allen ; and
John Foulkes, of Hart-street, in the parish of
St. George, Bloomsbury, in the said county
of Middlesex, solicitor for the said James
Coigley, severally make oath aod say —

And first the said Arthur O'Connor for him-
self saith, that William Cox, gunsmith,

Chanvbers, bookseller, — -I)rennan,f doctor
of physic, Jeremiah Hassett, warden of the
tower of Dublin, Eleanor Hassett, wife of the
said Jeremiah Hassett, Matthew Smith, gent.
William Dowdall, gent., general Hutchinson,^
■ ^ Mercer, esq., general Richard Cra-
dock, and Standish O'G ready, are material
witnesses for him this deponent, without
whose testimony he cannot safeljr proceed
upon his defence at the trial of tliis indict-
ment. And this deponent farther saith, that

the said William Cox, — Chambers,

Drennan, Jeremiah Hassett, Eleanor Hasset,
William Dowdall, -^^— Mercer, general
Richard Cradock, and Standish O'Gready, are
resident in the city of Dublin, in the kingdom
of Ireland ; and that the said Matthew 8mith
is resident at Belfast, in the said kingdoui
of Ireland; and that the said general Hutch-
inson is resident at the head quarters of the
army in the said kingdom of Ireland.

And the said James Coigley for himself
saith, that Bernard Coile and Valentine Derry
are material witnesses for biro this deponent,
without whose testimony he cannot safely
proceed upon hia defence at the trial of this
mdictment. And this deponent farther saith,
that the said Bernard Coile and Valentine
Derry are both resident in or near the city of
Dublin.

And the said Arthur O'Connor and James
Coigley, John Binntf, John Allen, and Jere-
miah Leary,- farther severally say, that being
kept in close confinement, without access to
persons or papers, they were not acquainted
with the nature of the charges against them,
and did not know what witnesses they should
respeotively have occasion to produce on their
behalf until the delivery of the copy of the in-
dictment, and of the list of witnesses on the
part of the prosecution, and that the same
were delivered to these deponents respectively
at or about nine of the clock in the evening of
the 17th day of April, instant, and not before.

And these deponents Arthur O'Connor and
James Coigly farther severally say, that im-
mediately after the delivery of the copies of

y -i ^*ii .Mil ■ —> • , » 4.I.. - ■ ■■

* He was one of the persons indicted with
llardy and Home Tooke for hikh treason, in
the year 1794. See their trials in the 24th
and 'idth vols, of this collection.

f As to him, seethe trial of Mr. Hamilton
Rowan, ante, vol. 29, p. 1033.
^l In tpoi created lord Hutchinson.

II •

IfOll

Jot J^h-TrtatM.

A, D. 179S.

imt'

.slant madt inquiries f<»a proper Mrson to be
sent to Irelana to procure the attendance of
the said witnesses, but that he was not able
to procure such person, whereupon a special
messenger was sent to Maidstone aforesaid to
desire the said John Foulkes to come to town
ipamediately for the purpose of bis going to
Ireland to procure the attendance of the said
witnesses.

. A nd this deponent John Foulkes for himself
farther saith, that at or about seven o^clock in
the evening of the said SOtb day of April in-
Btanty he this deponent received a letter by a
special messenger desiring this deponent to
set out fur London the moment be received
the same, as it was necessary he should so
to Ireland, and it could not be dispensed with,
and also informing this deponent that the said
messenger had been directed to order horses
for him this deponent on the road, which the
said mcssenjger informed this deponent lie had
done accordm^ly ; and this deponent farther
saith, that heme too ill to undertake the
joum^ he sent back a letter to that effect
immediately by the same messenger to inform
the counsel of the said defendants thereof,
and that he this deponent would nevertheless
be in London thereupon early the next morn-
ing, which said last-mentioned letter this de-
ponent gave the said messenger strict orders
to deliver that night without fail, with instruc-
tions to order horses to be ready for this de-
ponent on the road early the next morning.

And deponent further saith that he did
accordingly set out from Maidstone in a chaise
the next mqrning, at or before six o'clock, and
on his arrival to London made inquiries for
several persons whom he thought fit and
proper to be sent to Ireland for the purposes
aforesaid, but that no such person was found
till the aAemoon of that day, when Joshua
Xucock Wilkinson, of Gray's Inn, in the
county of Middlesex, attorney at law^ asreed
to go for the said purposes; and this depo-
nent saith, that about six o'clock in the even-
ing of that day, he this deponent delivered
the said addresses of the said several wit-
nesses, together with the sud instructions so
received by this deponent from the said James
Coigley and John Simmons as aforesaid, to
the said Joshua Lucock Wilkinson, who set
out that evening by the mail coach for Ire-
land, with the said addresses and instructions
as deponent is informed and verily believes,
and also with instructions to return with all

EDSsible expedition, and that the said Joshua
ucock Wilkinson is not yet returned firom
the said journey; and the said Arthur
OConnor and James Coigley further severally
'aay they respectively believe that the said
several persons will attend as witnesses on
;their respective beballs upon the said trial, if
this honourable Court will allow a sufficient
.time for their arrivd firom Ireland.
' And lastly, the said John Binns, John
Allen, and Jeremiah Leary, for themselves
wverally say, that they are advised by their
VOL. XXVI.

counsel and verily believe that the said wit-
nesses from Ireland, intended to be procjuced
by or on behalf of the said Arthur 0*Connfir.
and James Coigley, are material witnesses
for each of these deponents, without whose
testimony they could not safely proceed upon
their respective defences at the trial of this
indictment

All the eight depo-*
oents were sworn
in court, at Maid-
stone, in the county
of Kent, the 50th
of April, 1798, be-
fore

F. Duller.

JamtM Coigley^
A, O'Connor^
John Binm,
John Allen.
* J. Leafy,
J, Svntnons,
J. Aug. Bonney,
John Foulkes.

Kent to anY. — The kine against James
CCoigley, otherwise called James Quigley,
otherwise called James John Fivey, Arthur
O'Conner, esq., John Binns, John Allcn«
and Jeremiah Leary.

James Coigly, sued by the several names
above mentioned, and the above named
Arthur O'Conner, John Binns, John Allen,
and Jeremiah Leary, all now prisoners in the
gaol at Maidstone, in the county of Kent,
severally make oath —

That the application made to this honour-
able Court, for putting off the trials of these
deponents respectively, is not made for the
purpose of delay, but merely on account of
the materiality of the evidence of the several
witnesses, mentioned in the other affidavit
made by these deponents, in this prosecution,
who are expected from Ireland on behalf of
these deponents respectively, and without
whose testimony they cannot safely proceed
upon their respective defences to this indict-
ment.

All the five deponents x James Coig/y.
were sworn in Court I A. O'Connor^
at Maidstone, in the! JoAn JBtniu.
county of Kent, the ^ John Allen, «
30thApril^l798,before 1 /errmiaA Leaty,.
F. BuLLEa.y

Caption. — Kent to wit. Be It Remem-
bercd, Tliat at a Special Session of Oyec
and Terminer and Gaol Delivery holdeirat
Maidstone in and for the County of Kent oq
Tuesday the tenth day of April in the thirty-
eighth Year of the Reign of our Sovereiga
Lord George the Third King of Great Britain
and so forth Before the Honourable Sir
Francis Buller Baronet one of the justices of
our said Lord the King of his Court of Coior
mon Pleas the Honourable John Heath
Esquire one other of the Justice^ of our said
Lord the King of his Court of Common Pleas
and others their fellow Justices and Com-
missioners of our said Lord the King assigned
by Letters Patent of our said Lord the Sine
under the GreatSealof Great Britain to the sim3
Sir Francis Buller John Heath and others
their fellows Justices and CommissioBers 0f
our said Lord the Kiog^ a&d to aoj V^Q Of

4H •

i»Sj SB GfeORGft Ht.

more of them made and directed of whom
one of them the said Sir Francis Builer and
John Heath or of others in the said Letters
Patent named oar said Lord the King willed
to be one to inquire bv the Oath of Good and
Lawful Men of the County aforesaid of all
f lighTreasonsand Misprisions of HighTreason
other than such as relate to the Com of our
said JLord the Kin^ wUhin iht County afore-
said as well within Liberties as without by
whomsoever and in what mapner soever done
commiUed or perpetrated when how and after
what manner and of all other Articles and
Circumstances concerning the Promises and
every of them or any of them in any manner
whatsoever and the said Treasons and Mis-
prisions of Treason according to the Laws'and
Customs of England for this time to hear and
determine And also Justices aud Commis-
sioners of our said Lord the Kine assigned
and constituted by Letters Patent of our said
Jx)rd the King under the Great Seal of Great
Britain to the said Sir Francis BuUer John
Heath and others their fellows Justices and
Commissioners of our said Lord the Kins
and tu any two or more of them made ano
directed of whom one of them the said
Sir Francis Builer and John Heath or of
others in the said last mentioned Letters
Patent named our said Lord the King,
willed to be one to deliver the Gaol of our
said Lord the King of the County aforesaid of
the prisoners therem beingand detained on the
nineteenth Day of March in the thirty -eighth
Year aforesaid or who should be therein de-
tained before this present tenth Day of April
in the same year for or on account uf
any High Treasons or Misprisions of High
Treason other than such as relate to the Com
of our. said Lord the King by whomsoever and
in what manner soever done committed or
perpetrated and when That same Session of
Over and Terminer and Gaol Delivery is
a^onrned by the same Justices and Commis-
^ners of our said Lord the King above
named and others their fellows aforesaid to
be bolden at Maidstone aforesaid in and for
the County iiforesaid on Wednesday the
(Eleventh DtLy of this present month of April
inthe thirty-eighth year aforesaid Upon which
aaid Wednescfiy the eleventh day of thb
present Month of April in the thirty-eighth
irear aforesaid the same Session of O^er and
Tenniner and Gaol Delivery is hoMen by the
adjournment aforesaid at Maidstone afore-
said in and for the County aforesaid before
the said Justices and Commissioners of our
eaid Jjoid the King above named and others
their fellows aforesaid and thereupon at the
tame Session of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol
DeKvei^ holden by the adjournment aforesaid
4t Maidstone aforesaid in and for the Countj^
Hfoiesaidon the said Wednesday the eleventh
da^of April in the thirty-eighth year aforesaid
before the said Justices and Commissioners
of our said Lord the King above named and
Mien their feHow». aforesaid By the oath

Trial of tXCaiglif, CComw Mnd dheri [1S04

of Sir "Edward Knatchbull Baronet Sir 7ohn
Gregory Shaw Baronet Sir John Dixon Dyke
Baronet Sir William Geary Baronet Charles
Townshend Esquire Henrj Oxendon Esquire
William Hammond Esquire Geoi^e Polhill
Esquire Nicholas Roundel Toke Esquire
Lewis Cage the younger Esquire Edwaid
Austin Esquire George Grote Esquire George
Children Ksquire Francis Motley 'Austin
Esquire Edward Hussey Esquire John Larkeo
Esquire Thomas Brett Esquire Edward Peach
Esquire Henry Woodgate Esquire William
Francis Woodgate Esquire James Chapman
Esquire George Smith Esquire and Geom
Talbot Hatlcy Foote Esquire Good and Lawful
Men of the County aforesaid now here sworn
and charged to inquire for our said Lord the
King for the body of the said County touching
and concerning the Premises in the aforesaiS
several Letters Patent mentioned It is pre-
sented in manner and form as followeth that
is to say

Indictment. — JTm/ to wit. The Jurors
for our Lord the King upon their oath present
that long before and at the several times
hereinafter mentioned the persona exercis-
ing the powers of government In France
and the men of France under the government
of the said persons were open and public
enemies of our said Lord the King ana pro-
scnited and carried on open and public war
against our said Lord the King to wit at
Margate in the County of Kent and that
James O'Coiely late of Margate in the coun^
of Kent labourer otherwise called James
Qniglcy late of the same place labourer other-
wise called James John Fivey late of the
same place labourer Arthur O'Connor late of
the same place Esq John Binns late of the
same place labourer John Allen late of the
same place labourer and Jeremiah Leary late
of the same place labourer beine subjects of
our said Lord the King and well knowmg the
()remises but not having the fear of God
m their hearts nor weighmg the duty of their
allegiance and being moved and seduced by
the instigation of the devil as folse traitors
against our said Lord the King and wholly
withdrawing the love obedience fidetitv and
allegiance which every true and faithiiu sub-
ject of our said Lord the King should and of
right ought to bear towards our said I/>rd
the King on the twenty-seventh day of Fe-
bruary in the thiit^-eigblh year of the re^
of our said Sovereign Lord George the Third
by the grace of God Kirtf of Great Britain
France and Ireland Defender of the Faith &c.
and 4>n divers other days and times as weU
before as after with force and arms at M»c^
gate in the county of Kent malicioitt^ and
traitorously^ did amongst diemselv!^ afifl
together ^ith divers other &lse traitors wlioee
names are to the said jurors unknown con-
spire compass imagine and intend tolttixi^
and put onr said Lord the King to deaUi

And to fulfil perfect and bring to dBG?ct
their most evU'&nd ^Hcked treason and trei«

t

llMSJ

Jqr Hif/k Tr^tuon.

A. D. noBk

[1906.

■gnable oompassiog aod imagfiiatioa afortMiid
they the saia James O'Coiglv otherwise called
James Quigley otherwise called James John
Fivey Arthur O^Connor John Binns Joha
Allen and Jeremiah Lcaiy as such faUe tmitors
a|i aforesaid with force and arms on the twenty-
seventh day of February in the thirty-eighth
y^ear of the reign aforesaid and on divqrs other
(^ys and times as well before as after at Mar«
g^te in the county of Kent maliciously and
traitorously did assemble meet conspire con-
sult and agree amonest themselves and toge-
ther with divers other &lse traitors whose
Of^mes are to the said jurors unknown to stir
up raise and make rebellion and war against
QOr said Lord the King within this kingdom
and to incite encourage move and persuade
the said enemies of our said Lord the King to
make and cause to be made an hostile invar
aion of this kingdom with ships and armed
ihen to prosecute and wage vmx against our
said Lord the King within this kingdom
. And further to fulfil perfect and bring
Ip effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing and imagination
a£>resaid they the said James 0*Coi^ly other-
wise called James Quigley otlicrwise called
James John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John
Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary assuch
false traitors as aforesaid with force and arms
on the twenty-seventh day of February in the
tbtrty-eighth year of the reign aforesaid at
lHargate m the county of Kent maliciously
and traitorouslv did procure and obtain and
in their custocfy and possession conceal and
keep a certain paper writing theretofore com-
loosed and prepared to signifv and represent
and cause to be signified and represented to
the aforesaid enemies of our said Lord the
King that divers of the subjects of our said
hoi3 the King were ready to assist the said
^aemies of our said Lord the King in case the
said enemies of our said Lord the Kih^ shouki
ipake or cause to be made an hostile mvasion
of this kingdom with ships and armed men
Vo prosecute and wage war against our said
Lord the King within this kingdom and con-
lining incitements encouragements and per-
vasions to incite encourage persuade and
procure the said enemies ofour said Lord the
King to make and cause to be made such in-
vasion as aforesaid to prosecute and wage war
aigainst our said Lord the Kin^ within this
kmgdom and also containing information and
intelligence of and concerning the supposed
Qispositions of divers of the subjects of our
said Ix)rd the King towards our said Xiord the
King and his government and of and concern-
ing the revenue of our said Lord the King and
the means used to raise and increase the same
and the supposed failure of such means with
intent that they the said James O'Coigly
otherwise called James Quiejey otherwise
called James John Fivey Arwtir O'Connor
^ohn Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary
might unlawfully and traitorously carry and
f^Hyciy an(] cause t^ hf cairicHd ai^d cpnveyed

the said paper writing to parts beyond tha
seas to be delivered to certam persons of the
said enemies ofour said Lord the King such
persons being called in the said paper writing
the Executive Directory of France and might
thereby incite encourage persuade and pro-
cure the said enemies of our said Lord the
King to make and cause to be made ^n hos-
tile mvasion of this kingdom with ships and
armed men to prosecute and wage war a^nst
our said Lord the Kine within this kingdom

And further to fulfil perfect and brmg to
effect their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassingand imagination afore-
said they the said James 0*Coigly otherwtso
called James Quigley otherwise called James •
John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns
John Allen and Jeremiah Leary as feuch false-
traitors as aforesaid on the twenty-seventh
day of February in Uie thirty-eightli year of
the reign aforesaid with force and arms at
Margate in the county of Kent maliciously
and traitorously did treat and bargain and
cause and procure a treaty and bargain to be
had and made with one Thomas Norris and one
Jbhn Foreman concerning and for the hire of
a vessel and did then ancf there by such treaty
and bargain and by promise of money endea-
vour to obtain and hire a vessel to sail and go
from this kingdom unto and into, parts beyond
the seas in order that they the said James*
O'Coigly ' otherwise callea James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary might be conveyed and carried in
such vessel from this kingdom unto and into
parts beyond the seas and might in parts be-
yond the seas give advice intbrmation com*
fort aid and assistance to the said enemies of
our said Lord the King and incite encourage
persuade and procure the said enemies ofour
said*Lord the King to make and cause to be
made an hostile invasion of this kingdom
with ships and armed men to prosecute and
wage war against our said Lord the King
within this kin^om and might for the pur-
pose of such incitement encouragement per-
suasion and procurement as last aforesaid de-
liver and cause to be delivered the said paper
writing to certain persons of the aforesaid
enemies ofour said Lord the King such per-
sons being called in the said paper writing,
the Executive Directory of France

And further to fulfil perfect aud bring to^
effect their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing ^nd ima^natioa
aforesaid they the said James O'Coigly other*
wise called James Quigley otherwise called
James John Fivey Arthur O'Connor Joha
Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary as
such false traitors as aforesaid on the twenty*
seventh day of February in the thirty* eighth-
year of the reign aforesaid with force and
arms at Margate in the county of Kent ma*
liciously and traitorously did make a proposal
to and treat with and cause and procure a
propos4i aj;Kl treaty to be made and bad Iq

1307] S8 GEORGE m. Trial of ffCoigfy, O* Connor uni Miff TlStN^

and with one Robert Campbell concern ine
and fur the hire of a certain other vessel ana
did then and there by such proposal and treaty
endeavour to obtain and hire such vessel as
last aforesaid to sail and go from this kinv-
dom unto and into parts beyond the seas m
order that they the said James O'Coigly other-
vfise called James Quigley otherwise called
James John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John
Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary might
be carried and conveyed in the said last-men-
tfoned vessel from this kingdom unto and
into parts beyond the seas and might in parts
beyond the seas give advice information com-
fort aid and assistance to the said enemies of
our said Lord the King and incite encourage
))ersuade and procure the said enemies of our
aatd Lord the King to make and cause to be
nude an hostile mvasion of this kingdom
vrith ships and armed men to prosecute and
wave war against our said Lord the King
within this kingdom and might for the pur-
pose of such incitement encouragement per-
suasion and procurement as last aforesaid de-
liver and cause to be delivered the said paper
writing to certain persons of the aforesaid
clQeroics of our said Lord the King such per-
sons being called in the said paper writing
the Executive Directory of France

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked, treason
atnd treasonable compassing and tmaoiDation
aiforesaid they the said James 0*Coi^fy other-
wise called James Quigley otherwise called
James John Fivey Arthur (VConnor John
Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such*
false traitors as aforesaid on the twenty-
seventh day ef February in the thirty-eighth
year of the reign aforesaid with force and
arms at Margate in the county of Kent ma^
liciously and traitorously did make a prop9sal
and cause and procure a proposal to be made
to one Jeremiad Mowle concerning and for
the hire of a certain other vessel and did then
and there by such proposal endeavour to ob-
tain and hire such vessel as last aforesaid to
sail and go from this kingdom unto and into
parts beyond the seas in order that they the
^id James 0*Coigly otherwise called James
Quigley otherwise called James John Fivey
Arthur O'Connor John Binns John Allen and
Jeremiah Leary might be carried and con-
vened in the said last mentioned vessel from
this kingdoni unto and into parts beyond the
seas and might in parts beyond the seas
give advice information comfort aid and as-
sistance to the said enemies of our said Lord
the King and incite encourage persuade and
procure the said enemies of our said Lord the
King to make and cause to be made an hos-
tile invasion of this kingdom with ships and
armed men to prosecute and wage war against
our said Lord the King within this kingdom
and might for the purpose of such incitement
encouragement persuasion and procurement
as last aforesaid deliver and cause to be deli-
vered the said paper writing to certain persons

^f the aforesaid enemies of our said Lord the
King such persons being called in the said
paper writing the Executiye Directory of
France

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imagination afore-
said they the said James O'Coigly otherwise
called James Quigley otherwise called James
John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns
John Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such iklse .
traitors as aforesaid on the twenty- seventh
day of February in the thirty^eighth year of
the reign aforesaid with force and arms at
Margate in the county of Kent maliciously
and traitorously did meet and assemble them-
selves together having the said paper writing
secretly and traitorously in their custody and
possession in order to consult upon devise
contrive discoverand settle the means of going
and passing and in order to go and pass from
and out of this kingdom unto and into parts
b^ond the seas with intent that they the
said James O'Coigly otherwise called James
Quigley otherwise called James John Fivey
Arthur O'Conner John Binns John Allen and
Jeremiah Leary might in parts beyond the
seas give advice information comfort aid and
assistance to the said enemies of our said Lord
the King and incite encourage persuade and
procure the siud enemies of our said Lord tbe
King to make and cause to be made an hostile
invasion of this kingdom with ships and armed
men to prosecute and wage war against our
ssdd Lord the King within this kingdom and
might for Uie purpose of such incitement
encouragement persuasion and procurement
as last aforesaid deliver and cause to be de-
livered the said paper writing to certain per-
sons of the aforesaid enemies of our said Lord
the King such persons being called in the
said paper writing the Executive Directory of
France

And further to fulfil perfect and bring' to
effect their most evil ana wicked treason and
treasonable compassing and imagination afore-
said they the said James O'Coigly otherwise
called James Quigley otherwise called James
John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns
John Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such fidse
traitors as aforesaid on the twenty- seventh
day of February in the thirty-eighth year of
the reign aforesaid with force and arms at
Margate in the county of Kent maliciously
and traitorously did repair and go to a certain
house situate at Margate aforesaid in the said
county of Kent called the King's-Head in
order to discover procure and provide the
means of going and passing and in order to go
and pass trom and out of this kingdom unto
and into parts beyond the seas with intent
that they the said James O'Coigly otherwise
called James Quigley otherwise called James
John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns
John Allen and Jeremiah Leary might in parts
beyond the seas give advice information com-
fort aid and assistance to the said coeniies of

iik)9]

Jbt High TriMiotii

A. D. 1798.

[1210

«ur said Lord th« King anid incite encourage
persuade and procure the said enemies of our
said Lord the King to make and cause to be
made an hostile invasion of this kingdom with
ships and armed men to prosecute and wa^e
war a^inst our said Lord the King withm
this kingdom in contempt of our said Lord
the King and his laws to the evil example of
all others in the like case offending contrary
to the duty of the allegiance of them the said
James 0*Coigly otherwise called James Quidey
otherwise called James John Fivey Arttiur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah
Leary agatiist the form of the statute in such
case made and provided and against the peace
Of our said Lora the King bis crown and dig-
nity

And the Jurors aforesaid upon their oath
aforesaid do further present that the said
JamesO'Coigly otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary being subjects of our said Lord
the King as aforesaid as false traitors against
our saidXord the King d urine the said war to
wit on the twenty-seventh day of February
in the thirty- eighth year of the reign aforesaid
and on divers other days and times as well
before as aAer with force and arms at Margate
in the county of Kent unlawfully and traitor-
ously were adherine to and aiding and com-
forting the aforesaio enemies of our said Lord
the King and in pursuance performance and
execution of their treason and treasonable
adhering aforesaid they the said James
O'Coigly otherwise called James Quieley
otherwise called James John Fivey Artnur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah
Leary as such false traitors as aforesaid with
force and arms on the twenty-seventh day of
February in the thirty-eighth year of the reign
aforesaid and on divers other days and times
as well before as after at Margate in the
county of Kent maliciously and traitorously
did assemble meet conspire consult and agree
amongst themselves ana together with divers
6ther false traitors whose names are to the
said itirors unknown to stir up raise and make
rebellion and war against our said Lord the
King within tliis kingdom and to incite en-
courage move and persuade the said enemies
of our said Lord the King to make and cause
to be made an hostile invasion of this king-
dom with ships and armed men to prosecute
and waee war against our said Lord the King
within Uiis kin^om

And in further pursuance performance and
execution of their treason and treasonable
adhering aforesaid thev the said James
O'Coigly otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah
Leary as such false traitors as aforesaid with
force and arms on the twenty -seventh day of
February in the thirty-eighth year of the reign
aforesaid at Margate in the county of Kent
maliciously and traitorously did procure and

obtain and in their custody and possession
conceal and keep a certain paper writing
theretofore composed and prepared to signify
and represent and cause to be signified and
represented to the aforesaid enemies of our
said Lord the King that divers of the subjects
of our said Lord the King were ready to assist
the said enemies of our said Lord the King in
case the said enemies of our said Lord the
King should make or cause to be made an
hostile invasion of this kingdom with ships
and armed men to prosecute and wage war
against our said Lord the King within this
kingdom and containing incitements en-
couragcments and persuasions to incite en-
courage persuade ana procure the said enemies
of our said Lord the King to make and cause
to be made such invasion as aforesaid to pro-
secute and wage war against our said Lord
the King within this kingdom and also con-
taining information and intelligence of and
concerning the supposed dispositions of divers
of the subjects of our said Lord the King to-
wards our said Lord the King and his Govern-
ment and of and concerning the revenue of
our said Lord the King and the means used
to raise and increase the same and the sup-
posed failure of such means with intent that
they the said James O'Coigly otherwise called
James Quigley otherwise called James John
Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary might unlawfully
and traitorously carry and convey and cause
to be carried and conveyed the said last men-
tioned paper writing to parts beyond the seas
to be delivered to certain persons of the said
enemies of our said Lord tne King such per-
sons being called in the said last-mentioned
paper writing the Executive Directory of
France and might thereby incite encourage
persuade and procure the said enemies of our
said Lord the King to make and cause to be
made an hostile invasion of this kingdom with
ships and armed men to prosecute and wage
war against our said Lord the King within this
kingdom

And in further pursuance performance and
execution of their treason and treasonable
adhering aforesaid they the said James
O'Coigly otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen andJeremiah
Leary as such false traitors as aforesaid on the
twenty- seventh day of February in the thirty-
eighth year of the reign aforesaid with force
and arms at Margate in the county of Kent
maliciously and traitorously did treat . and
bargain and cause and procure a treaty and
bargain to be had and made with one Thomas
Norris and one John Foreman concerning
and for the hire of a vessel and did then and
thereby such treaty and bargain and by pro-
mise of money endeavour to obtain and hire
a vessel to sail and go from this kingdom'
unto and into parts beyond the seas in order
that they the said James O'Coigly otherwise
called Jatnes Quigley otherwise called James'

Ill 1] 38 GEORGB UL Trial offfQoiglf, OCm^lw and othtrt [1212

Jpbu Fivey Arthur O^CooDor John Binns,
John Allen and Jeremiah Lcary nii^t be
conveyed and carried in such vessel from this
kingdom unto and into parts heyond the seas
«nd naight in parts beyond the seas give ad-
vice information comfort aid and asssistance
to the said enemies of our said Lord the King
i^d incite encourase persuade and procure
the said enemies of our said I^ord the King
to make and cause to be made an hostile inva-
sion of this kingdom with ships and armed
men to prosecute and wage war against our
8^d Ix>rd the King within this kingdom and
might for the purpose of such incitement en*
cpurvficment persuasion and procurement as
last aforesaid aeliver and cause to be delivered
the said last mentioned paper writing to cer-
tain persons of the aforesaid enemies of our
said Lord the King such persons being called
in the said last mentioned paper writing the
Executive Directory of France

And in further pursuance performance and
execution of their treason and treasonable
adhering aforesaid they the said James
0*Coigly otherwise called James Quieley
otherwise called James John Fivey Artnur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary aji such false traitors as aforesaid
00 the twenty-seventh day of February in the
thirty-eizhth year of the reign aforesaid with
force and arms at Margate in the county of
Kent maliciously and traitorously did make a
proposal to and treat with and cause and pro-
cure a proposal and treaty to be made and
had to and with one Robert Campbell con-
cf rning and for the hire of a certain other
▼esscl and did then and there by such propo-
sal and treaty endei^vour to obtain and hire
such vessel as last aforesaid to sail and go
from this kingdom unto and into parts beyond
the seas in order that thev the said James
(rCoigly otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey Arwur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary might be carried and conveyed in
the said last- mentioned vessel from this king-
dom unto and into parts beyond the seas and
mijgbt in parts beyond the seas give advice
information comfort aid and assistance to the
said enemies of our said Lord the King and
incite encourage persuade and procure the
said enemies of our said Lord the King to
make and cause to be made an hostile inva-
sion of this kingdom with ships and armed
men to prosecute and wage war against our
siiid I/)ra the King within this kingdom and
might for the purpose of such incitement en-
couragement persuasion and procurement as
last aforesaid deliver and cause to be delivered
the said Jast-mentioned paper writing to cer-
tein persons of the aforesaid enemies of our
said Lord the King such persons bein^^ called
in the said last-mentioned paper writing the
j^xecutive Directory of France

And in further pursuance performance and
i;xecution of their treason and treasonable
leering aforesaid they tlie said James

O'Coigly otherwise called Jiuocs'Qttigl^
otherwise called James John Fivey ArUiur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
roiah Leary as such false traitors as aforesaid
on the twenty-seventh day of February in tho
thirty-eighth year of the reign aforesaid with
force aiM arms at Margate in the county of
Kent malicuiusly and traitorously did make a

Proposal and cause and procure a proposal to
e made to one Jeremiah Mowle concerning
and for the hire of a certain other vessel and
did then and there by 8uch.proposal endeaivoar
to obtMn and hire such vessel as last afore-
said to sail and go from this kingdom unt»
and into parts Myond the seas in order that
they the said James OXkiigly otherwise
called James Quigley otherwise called James
John, Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns
John Allen and Jeremiah Leary might be
carried and conveyed in the said last-men-
tioned vessel firom this kingdom unto and into.
parts beyond the seas ami might in parts
beyond tne seas give advice information com*
fort aid and assistance to the said enemies of
our said Lord the King and incite enoounge
persuade and procure the said enemies of our
said Lord the King to make and causo to be
made aa hostile invasion of this kingdom
with ships and armed men to prosecute and
wage war against our said Lord the King
wimin this kingdom and might for the pur-
pose of such inatement encouragement pa-*
suasion and procurement as last afoiaiaid
deliver and cause to be delivered the said last-
mentioned paper writing tacertain persons of
the aforesaid enemies of our said Lord the
King such persons being called in the said
last^mentioned paper writing the Executive
Directory of France

And in further pursuance performance and
execution of their treason and treasonable
adhering aforesaid thev the said James
0*Coigly otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen am) Jere-
miah Leary as such false traitors as aforesaid
on the twenty -seventh day of February in tbe
thirty-eishth year of the reign aforesaid with
force and arms at Margate aforesaid in the
said county of Kent maliciously and tru-
torously did meet and assemble themselves
together having the said last- mentioned pamper
writing secretly and traitorously in their cos-
tody and possession in order to consult upon
devise contrive discover and settle the o^eana
of going and passing and in order to go and
pass from and out of this kingdom unto and
into parts beyond these as with intent that they
the said James O'Coigly otherwise called Jnmes
Quigley otherwise called James John Ftvey
Arthur O'Connor John Binns John Allea and
Jeremiah Leary might in parts beyond the
seas give advice iniormation comfort aid and
assistance to the said enemiesof our said Lord
the King and incite encourage persuade and
procure the said enemies of our said Inrd the
King to make and cause, to bemadaan hoalite

18133

fir High TrtoiOn.

A. D. 1799.

CI»U

invasion of this kingdom with ships and armed
men to prosecute and wage war against our
taid Loni the Ring within this kingdom and
might for the purpose of such incitement en-
fcouragement persuasion and procurement as
last aforesaid deliver and cause to he delivered
the said last-mentioned paper writing to cer-
tain persons of the aforesaid enemies of our
said Lord the King such persons bein^ called
in the said last-mentioned paper writing the
Executive Directory of France

And in further pursuance performance and
execution of their treason and treasonable
adhering aforesaid they the said James
0*Coigly otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John FLvey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary as such false traitors as aforesaid
<m the twenty- seventh day of February in the
thirty- eighth year of the reign aforesaid with
force and arms at Margate in the county of
Kent maliciously and traitorously did repair
and go to a certain house situate at Margate
aforesaid in the said county of Kent called
the Kind's Head in order to discover procure
and provide the means of going and passing
and ra order to go and pass from and out of
this kinedom unto and into parts beyond the
feeas wiui intent that they the said James
0*CoigIy otherwise called James Quigley
otherwise called James John Fivey ArSiur
O'Connor, John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary might in parts beyond the seas
g^ve advice information comfort ud and
assistance to the said enemies of our said Lord
the King and incite encourage persuade and
procure the said enemies of our said Lord the
king to make and cause to be made an hos-
tile invasion of this kingdom with ships and
armed men to prosecute and wage war against
our said Lord the Kine within this kingdom
In contempt of our satd Lord the King and
his laws to the evil example of all others in
the h'ke case offending contrary to the duty
of the allegiance of them the said James
O'Coigly otherwise called James Quigley
o.therwbe called James John Fivey Arthur
lO*Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary asainst the form of the statute in
such case made and provided and aeainst the
peace of our said Lord the King his crown
and dignity

And the Jim>TS aforesaid upon their oath
aforesaid do further present that the said
James O'Coigly otherwise called James Quig-
ley otherwise c^led James John Hvey Arthur
O^nnor John Binns Jolm Allen and Jere-
miah Leaiy being^ subjects of our said Lord
Hfm^ King as aforesaid as false uaitors against
our teid Lord the Kins after the eighteenth
dta^ of Becembisr which was in tte y«ar of
our Lord one thousand seven hundred and
ninety-five to wit on the twenty-seventh day
of February in the thirty- eighth year of the
reign aforesaid and on divers other days and
tiihes as well before as af\er the said last-
tneotioned day with force and arms within

ihts realm to wit at Mar^te in the county of
Kent maliciously and traitorously did compass
imagine invent devise and intend to mov^
and stir certain foreieuers and strangers that
is to say the aforesaid persons exercising the
powers of government in France and the men
of France under the government of the said
persons with force to invade this realm and
the same last-mentioned compassings ima<>

§i nations inventions devices and intentions
id then and there express utter and declare
by divers overt acts and deeds hereinafter
mentioned that is to say

In order to fulfil perfect and bring to effedt
their most evil and wicked treason and trea-
sonable compassings imaginations inventions
devices and intentions last mentioned they
the said James O'Coigly otherwise callea
James Quigley otherwise called James John
Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such false trac-
tors as aforesaid with force and arms on thfe
twenty-seventh day of February in the thirty-
eighth year of the reign aforesaid and oh
divers other days and times as well before ab
after at Margate in the county of Kent mali-
ciously and traitorously did assemble tntA
conspire consult and agree amongst them-
selves and together wiui divers other fals^
traitors whose names are to the said juroia
unknown to incite encourage move and pe^
suade the said foreigners and straneers tb
make and cause to be made an hostile inva-
sion of this kingdom with ships and atmed
men to prosecute and wage war aeainst out
said Loitl the King witfain this kin^om

And further to fulfil perfect and hring t6
effect their most evil and wicked treasoil
and treasonable compassings imaginations
inventions devices and intentions last afore-
said they the said James 0*Coigly othei^
wise called James Quigley otherwise called
James John Fivey Arthur O'Connor Johtk
Binns John Al|en and Jeremiah Leary aa
such false tmitors as aforesaid with rorce
and arms on the twenty-seventh day of Fe-
bruary in the thirty-eighth year of the reigti
aforesaid at Margate in the county of Kerrt
maliciously and traitorously did procure anA
obtain and in their custody ana possession
conceal and keep a certain paper writinj
theretofore composed and prepared to signify
and represent and cause to be signified an(
represented to the aforesaid foreigners and
strangers that divers of the subjects of 'our
sud Lord the Kiii£ were ready ^ assist tha
said foreigners and stranzers in case the said
foreigners and strangers should make or caus^
to be made an hostile invasion of this kingdota
with ships and armed men to prosecute and
wage war agmnst our aaid Lordthe King withih
this kingdom and containing incitements
encouragements and persuasions to incite
encourage persuade and procure the said fo^
reigners and' strangers to make and cause to
be made such invasion ad aforesaid to prose-
cute and wage war Against our said fjm

1915] S8 GEORGE UI. TridqfO'Coigly.&Conmr andothert [1216

the Kinj; within this kin^om and also ccui-
taining mformaiion and intelligence of and
concerning the supposed dispositions of
divers of the subjects of our said Lord the
King towards our said Lord the King and
his Government and of and concerning the
revenue of our said Lord the King and the
means used to raise and increase the same
and the supposed failure of such means with
intent that thev the said James O'Coi^ly
otherwise called James Quigley otherwise
called James John Fivey Arthur O'Connor
John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary
might unlawfully and traitorously carry and
convey and cause to be carried and con-
veyed the said last-mentioned paper writing
to parts beyond the seas to be delivered to
certain persons of the said foreigners and
strangers such persons being called in the said
last-mentioned paper writine the Executive
Directory of France and might thereby incite
encourage persuade and procure the said fo-
reigners ana strangers to make and cause to
be made an hostile invasion of this kingdom
with ships and armed men to prosecute and
waee war against our said Lord the King
within this kingdom

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassings imaginations inven-
tions devices and intentions last aforesaid
they the said James O'Coigly otherwise
called James Quigley otherwise called James
John Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns
John Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such false
traitors as aforesaid on the twenty-seventh
day of February in the thirty- eighth year of
the reign aforesaid with force and arms at
Margate in the county of Kent maliciously
and traitorously did treat and bargain and
oause and procure a treaty and bargain to be
had and made with one Thomas Norris and
one John Foreman concerning and for the
hire of a vessel and did then and there by
such treaty and bargain and by promise of
money endeavour to obtain and hire a vessel
to sail and go from this kingdom unto and
into parts beyond the seas in order that they
the said James O'Coigly otherwise called
James Quigley otherwise called James John
Jivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary might be con-
veyed and carried in such vessel from this
kingdom unto. and into parts beyond tlie
seas and might in parts beyond the seas
give advice information aid and assistance
to the said foreigners and strangers and incite
.encourage persuade and procure the (said fo-
reigners ana strangers to make . and cause to
be made an hostile invasion of this kingdom
with ships and armed men to prosecute and
waee war against our said Lord the King
.wimin this kingdom and might for the pur-
pose of such incitement tocouragement per-
suasion and procurement as last aforesaid
iteliver and cause to be delivered the said
Ust-mentioned paper writing to certain per-

sons of the aforesaid foreigners «nd strangers
such persons being call^ in the said last
mentioned paper writing the Executive Di«
rectory of France

Ana further to fulfil perfect and bring \b
effect their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassings imaginations inven-
tions devices and intentions last aforesaid
they the said James O'Coigly otherwise called
James Quigley otherwise called James John
Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such false traT-
tors as aforesaid on the twenty-seventh day
of February in the thirty-eighth year of the
reign aforesaid with force and arms at Mar*
gate in the county of Kent maliciously and
traitorously did make a proposal to and treat
with and cause and procure a proposal and
treaty to be made and had to and with one
Robert Campbell concerning and for the hire
of a certain other vessel and did then and
there by such proposal and treaty endeavour
to obtain and hire such vessel as last aforesaid
to sail and go from this kingdom unto and into
parts beyond the seas in order that they the
said James O'Coigly otherwise called James
Quieley otherwise called James John Fivey
Arthur O^Connor John Binns John Allen
and Jeremiah Leary might be carried and
conveyed in the said last-men tione4 vessel
from this kingdom unto and into parts be^
yond the seas and might in parts beyond the
seas give advice information and assistance
to the said foreigners and strangers and incite
encourage persuade and procure the said
foreigners and slranzers to make and cause
to be made an hostile invasion of this king-
dom with ships and armed men to prosecute
and wage war against our said Lord the King
within this kingdom and might for the pur-
pose of such incitement encouragement per^
suasion and procurement as last aforesaid deli-
ver and cause to be delivered the said last-men*
tioned paper writing to certain persons of the
aforesaid foreigners and strangers such persons
being called in the said last-mentiunod paper
writins the Executive Directory of France

Ana further to fulfil tierfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassings imaginations inven.-
tions devices and intentions l^t aforesaid
they the said James O^Coigly otherwise called
James Quigley otherwise called James Johlk
Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such ftlse tr^
.'tors as aforesaid on the twenty- seventh day
Februanr in the thirty-eighth year of the
reign amresaid with force and arms at Mar-
gate in the county of. Kent maliciously and
traitorously did make a proposal and cmise
and procure a proposal Vor 1m made to one
Jeremiah Mowle concerning and for the bice
of a certain other vessel and did ttai mad
there by such proposal endeavour to oblaun
and hire such vessel as last aforesaid to wkXwbA
go from this kingdom unto and into Mijts.b^
yond the seas in order that they thesai4 luM^

1217]

Joy High Treason.

A. D. 1798.

[1818

0'Coig]y otherwise called JaroesQuigley other-
wise mled James If ohn Ftvey Arthur O'Connor
John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary
might be carried and conveyed in the said last-
mentioned vessel from this kingdom unto and
into parts beyond the seas and might in parts
beyond the seas give advice information and
assistance to the said foreigners and strangers
and incite encourage persuade and procure
the said foreigners and strangers to likake and
cause to be made an hostile invasion of this
kingdom with ships and armed men to pro-
secute and wage war against our said Lord
the King within this kingdom and might for
the purpose of such incitement encourage-
ment persuasion and procurement as last
aforesaid deliver#and cause to be delivered
the said last-mentioned paper writing to cer-
tain persons of the aforesaid foreigners and
strangers such persons being called in the
said last-mentioned paper writing the Execu-
tive Directory of France

And further to fulfil perfect and bring to
effect their most evil ana wicked treason and
treasonable compassings imaginations invcfi-
tions devices and intentions last aforesaid
they the said James O'Coigly otherwise called
James Quig^lcy otherwise called James John
Fivey Arthur O'Connor John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such false trai-
tors as aforesaid on the twenty-seventh day
of February in the thirty- eighth year of the
reign aforesaid with force and arms at Mar-
gate in the county of Kent maliciously and
traitorously did meet and assemble them-
selves together having the said last-men-
tioned paper writing secretly and traitorously
in their custody and possession in order to
consult upon devise contrive discover and
settle the means of going and passing and in
order to go and pass from and out of this
kinsdom unto and into parts beyond the seas
with intent that they the said James O'Coi^ly
otherwise called James Quigley otherwise
called James John Fivey Artnur O'Connor
John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary
mUht in parts beyond the seas eive advice
information and assistance to the said fo-
reigners and strangers and incite encourage
persuade and procure the said foreigners and
stransers to make and cause to be made an
hostile invasion of this kingdom with ships
and armed men to prosecute and wage war
a^nst our said Lord the King within this
kmgdom and might for the purpose of such
incitement encouragement persuasion and
procurement as last aforesaid deliver and '
cause to be delivered the said last-mentioned
paper writing to certain persons of the afore-
9ud foreigners and strangers such persons
beiojg called in the said last- mentioned paper
writine the Executive Directory of France.
. Ana further to fulfil perfect and bring to
•ftet their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassings imaginatious inven-
tions devices and intentions last aforesaid they
tfao said James O'Ooi^y o|hdrvise .called

VOL XXVI.

James Quigley otherwise called James John
Fivey Arthur O'Connor 'John Binns John
Allen and Jeremiah Leary as such false trai- *
tors as aforesaid on the twenty-seventh day
of Febniary in the thirty-eighth year of the
reign aforesaid with force and arms at Mar-
gate in the county Of Kent maliciously and
traitorously did repair and go to a certain
house situate at Margate aforesaid in the said
county of Kent cal^d the King's Head in
order to discover procure and provide the
means of going and passing and in order to
go and pass from and out of this kingdom
unto aha into parts beyond the seas witlx
intent that they the said James O'Coi^ly
otherwise called James Quigley otherwise
called James John Fivey Arthur O'Connor
John Binns John Allen and Jeremiah Leary
might in parts beyond the seas give advice in-
formation and assistance to the said fo*
reigners and strangers and incite encourage
persuade and procure the said foreigners aud
strangers to make and cause to be made an
hostile invasion of this kingdom with ships
and armed men to prosecute and wage war
against our said Lord the King within this
kingdom in contempt of our said Lord the
King and his laws to the evil example of all
others in the like case offending contrary to
the duty of the allegiance of them the said
James O'Coigly otherwise called James Quig-
ley otherwise called James John Fivey Arthur
O'Connor John Binns John Allen and Jere-
miah Leary against the form of the statute
in such case lately made and provided and
against the peace of our said Lord the King
his crown and dignity.

On Monday, Ma^ the 2l8t, 1798, the Court
met, pursuant to adjournmenti at seven o'clock
in the morping.

Pretent^-The ri^ht hon. lord Romney ; the
hon. Mr. Justice Buller; the hon. Mr. Jus-
tice Heath; the hon. Mr. Justice Law-
rence ; and Mr. Serjeant Shepherd.

Counsel for the Crown,

Mr. Attorney, General [sir John Scott,
afterwards lord chancellor Eidon].

Mr. Solicitor General [sir John Mitford,
afterwards lord Redesdale and lord chancellor
of Ireland].

Mr. Garrow [afterwards a baron of the
court of Exchequer].

Mr. Adam [afterwards lord chief commit*
sioner of the Jury Court and a baron of the
court of Exchequer of Scotland, and one of his
majesty*s most honourable privy council].
Mr. Fielding.

Mr. Abbott [afterwards lord chief justice of
the court of King's-bench.]

SoUcHor, — Joseph White, esq. solidtor for
the afiairs of his majesty's Treasury.

Counsel for the Prisoner $ auigned by ike Court,

Mr. Pliimer [afterwards successively vic»*
4 I

IS 1 9] 38 GEO RG E til. Trial gf 0' Cqiglif^ Q' Cmnor and others £ 129Q

^liaqceilor of Ensland^ and master erf* Ihf
RolU].

Mr, Dallas [ai\erwards lord chief justice of
the court of Common Pleasl. Mr. Gurneyy
Mr. f crgqson, Mr. William bcott.

AaistafU Counsel. — Mr. George Smith.

dol^Uor^. — Mr. Simmons, of Rochester,
Mr. John Foulkes, aod Mr. BomMy, oif
liondoo.

James 0*Coi^Iy, otherwise called James
^igley, otherwise called James John Fivev;
Arthur O'Connor, esa. John Binns; John
Allen; and Jeremiah Xeary. were set to the

Mr. Plun^r. — I hope your lordships will
4o me the justice to believe that it is with
great uneasiness I feel myself under the ne*
cessity of interrupting the proceedings of the
present day; but I am sure your wrdshipa
will feel tliat it was incumbent upon me not
V> delay a single moment in statins to you
ttie contents of the affidavit that i Lave in
my hand ; which contains a charge of the
Coulest nature ; one of the grossest contempts
of the Court, and one of tne most daring at-
tempu to violate public justice^ that ever was
heard of^

I fee) it incumbent upon me to prevent for
a single moment any impression being made
to the prejudice of the gentlemen who are
concerned for the prosecution, by stating that
I do not in the least mean, directly or indi-.
lactly^ to impute in the smallest degree to
any one of them, or to any person concerned
in the p^secution, the foul chaise that I am
now to state to your lordship^. — When it was
first stated to me, it appeared to be of so ex-
traordinary a nature, that I certainly did not
tive entire credit to the wicked attempt that
nad been made to tamper with the jury, till I
had used every possible means of ascertaining
the fact

The chi^ge is founded upon the affidavit of
most lespectablc persons, of whose veracity
and honour there will not b? the lea^t ques-
tion.—My lord, ^n attempt has been made to
prejudice the trial of these prisoners, by con-
^lersations held with persons known to be
mrymen, and by the most improper topica
being addressed to the feelings and to the
understandings of thos^ men^ to induce them
to come into court, with a predetermined
gufpose of convijCtipn.-^My lords, 1 will state
precisely what has been the nature of this
conversation; and your lordships will be
astonished to hear that the gentleman against
whoi9 I make this charsc bears the character
of a. clergyman : but I shall prove it under
his own hand. Fortunately for the prisoners,
>ve are now in possession of the account he
gave of the attempts he had been making to
f rac^ witli thoise persons who he knew were
summoned to constitute a part of the jur)5
upon. this solemn occasion. He writes thus-:-
<* I dined with three of the jurymen of the
Qlit^kbtira h¥sidrei^ who' bavQ bmi stmi-

moB^ to Maidstone, %o the trial of O'Counor
and company : and it is not a little singular
t))at not one yeoman of this district should
have been summoned to an assise for this
county, nor to any quarter sessions (excepting
the Midsummer) U>t more than fifly yeafs*. —
These three yeomen are wealthy yeomon, and
partizans of the * High Court Party.' Now
this is as it ought to l^ ; and as they are good
farmers, and much in my interest — ^tf> he
sure^ I exerted all my eloquence to convince,
them, how absolutely necessary it is, at the
presiont moment, for the security of thei reilai,
that the felons should swin£»— I r^ieseoted
to them that the acquittal of Ilar4y and com^
pany laid the founcktion of the present con^
spiracy, the Manchester, London Corvespoed-:
ing. &c. &Q. I urged them biy all poasiUe
me^ms in my power to hang tnem throusb
mercy : a memento to othef ^ : that had the.
others have suffered, the deep lud coospira^
which is coming to light would have been bc-s
cessarily cru&hed in its infimoy. — ^These with
many other arguments I pressed with a view
that tbev should go into court avowedly de-
termined in th^ir verdict-«-QO matter what
the evidence. — An innocent roan committad
to gaol never offers a bribe te a turnkey to Id.
him escape. O'Connor did this to my.kQow-
ledge; and although the judge*' — J bi^
pardon for statins here the foul imputatieaa
upon your lordsliip— ^ and although thfi>
judge is sufficiently stern, and seldom a^QUMlv
when hanging is necessary, the oojy fear I
have is, that when the jury ia impanelled^
the <' Bines*' may ga)a the ascendaucy-r-ia
short, 1 pressed the matter so much upon
their senses, that if any one of the three isi
chosen, I ttonk something mav be dona. —
These three men have eained their good
fortunes by farming; and I think thev. am
now thoroughly sensible that they woidn lose
every shilling by acquLttine these felona.''

The remainder of the letter I do not vead,'
because it does not concern this saiajeetr^
This letter is in the hand-writiitt of tho.
reverend Arthur Youne; it was adoressedla
a gentleman at Bury, wno has deposed to the
receipt of it, and to its being in the hand-^
writing of Mr. Arthur Young. — We have,
given notice to Mr. Arthur Young of tlie af^

Klication intended to be made to the Court;
e acknowledged that he wrote the letter ^
and being called upon to slate who the Ibiee
persona were to whom he allude^ in order.
th^ wie might he enabled to make it the anbv^
ject o( distinct chiilenge, he refused to name
them. Under these circumstancesi I am aure^
it will be the wish of your lordahips, and 1 i^i^
oonfideat it is of the proaccutors, to pceveni
tliese genitlemea heins brought to their triel
und^C the heavy weight of prejudices wfaicb
may have been cream, in the mmd of any
one of the persons with whom this ceeveis*-
tion haabeen held; what ooutae yuur loidk
ship wiU pursue it it not for me to stata^ it
I W«9i toy du^ to put t^ OourtiB poaseeiioa ef

1«1]

fof High Treaion,

A. t). 1796.

the cih:uttlsUno6) Md I am sore I shftYl heve
ibm oo*o))eration ef every gentleman present^
ia endeavouring to discovek', if possible, who
the persons are with whom this conversation
has oeen held, in order to prevent their con-
ttitoling a part of the present jury ; with how
many more the same sort of conversation has
been held I know not, but it is clear that
this conversation has been held with three at
least.

I believe that I ought to accompany this
with in applicatiota to your lordships per-
sonally, against the individual who has un-
qaeskionably been guilty of a gross and high
kontempt of the Court.

Mr. Justice HetUk. — He is not here.

Mr. Plumer, — ^We have given him notice.

Mr. Justice Heath, — But our commission is
determinable before we can proceed to punish-
ment.

Mr. Justice Bulltr, — Certainty it ought
not to nase unpunished — will you have him
caHed?

Mr. PloMtr, — Ves, if your lordship pleases.

Mh Justice Bnller, — Call him by his name.

[Hie rev. Arthur Young was called^ but did
not appear.]

Mr. Ptumer. — When the rev. Arthur Young
Waft told of an application being to be made
to the Court agamst him, be said lie should
tonsult Mr. Forbes, an attorney, a relation of
his, as to what would be best for him to do.

Mr. Justice Heaih. — tt is a very great of-
fence ; what would ybu wish us to do upon it
at present?

Mr. Plumer,'^! am sure it is your lord-
ehip*s wish, generally, to protect the puritv of
Justice, and that these proceedings snoula go
on in a way to attain that iustice ; there are
summoned frdm the Blackburn hundred a
number of freeholders to serve as jurors ; I
presume there will be no objection to a ques-
tion being put from an officer under your
lordship*s direction, or from your lordship, to
each of them as they are called, to know
whether any one of them is a person, with
whom this conversation has been held.

Mr. Justice BulUr. — ^We may ask this ques-
tion, Have you heed In company with Mr.
Arthur Young? but We tannot ask a juryman
any Oueation that tends to criminate him-
lelK

Mn P/ttMer.-^l am perfectly aware of that.

Mr. Justice B«/ler.->-What part these jury*
men took we know not; they may be pure
und clUiltless: this clergyman ought to be
pimisned, and very heavily.

Mr. Justice Heath.-^As I understand the
letter, he says he thought he made an imprcs-
Moh upon them; there is no imputation upon
them^ A>r a man may listen to another, and
ttot bay anv attention to what he wy9,

Mr. l>fi/fo<.— :I eertainly do not think it ne-
cessary to add much to my friend Mr. Plumei^s
tlMservatiOns, because it seems sufficient for
tut Ihat the Court b put in posseisidn of the

fact ; I have no doubt that every thing will be .
done to counteract a plot nf so base and of so
infamous a nature, and to guard the purity of
the administration of justice ; I rise, there-
fore, for the purpose merely of making ona
observation upon what fell from one of the
learned judges : it is truly said, that upon the
affidavit which has been staled to the Court,
it does not appear that these jurymen assented
to the arguments that were urged to induce
them to convict, whatever the evidence might
be ; but the question is, whether your lord-
ships will put these prisoners upon their triali
witnout that fact appearing one way or the
other, after your lordships have been put in
possession of evidence, from which it does ap-
pear, that attempts of this sort have been
made. A great variety of cases have oc-
curred, in which trials have been put off on
account of the circulation of pamphlets, Writ-
ten with a view to an impending trial.^ I am
not aware that, in anyone of those cases,
evidence has been laid before the Cotlft, that
those pamphlets did produce the effect in-
tended ; it was enough that they might pro-
duce the effect, and therefore I take for grant-
ed, that if this had been done with respect to
all the jury, whether it had appeared or had
not appeared that it had produced any effect,
the Court would upon that ground generally
have put off the trial altogether; th6n the
question is, whether, when it does appfear
with respect to some of this jury, your lord-
ship will not institute that inquiry before they
arc sworn, which is necessary for the purpose
of justice ; it does not seem to me essential
to such an application to prove, that in point
of effect the endeavour did succeed; it is
enough that the endeavour has been made.

Mr. AUomey General,"-! am perfectly per-
suaded, that I do not take to myself a degree
of credit for feelings that are not genume,
when I protest, in the name of the country,
that I near, with great affliction, that any
such circumstance has taken place, as that
which has been mentioned this day in the
court; and I have no difficulty in stating,
that if, upon an inquiry into the truth of tins
matter, conducted upon principles of justice,
with respect to all the parties concerned in it,
I should find reason finally to think, that the
cbarcre made by this affidavit is true' I have
no difficulty in stating here, that I think it
my bounden duty to those persons who stand
at the bar, that I think it my bounden duty
to the country, and that I ought to be dis«
missed with .disgrace from my onice instantly,
if I hesitated one moment to exercise the ut-
most powers that my office confers upou me,
to bring to justice any man who dares to hold
this sort of language to a person who is to exe*
cute the office of a juror in this countiy.

I perfectly agree, that the law knows no

more of the character of a juror than this,

- •

* See the case of the dean of St. Asaph,
aHii, vtl. ti, pp. 848, H teij.

l^SS] 88 GEORGE III. Trial ofO'Cmgly, O'Connor and others [1284

otherwise called James Jphn Fivey. Arthur
O'Connor, esq. John Binnsy John Allen, and
Jeremiah Leary, on a charge of high treason.
*< Gamaliel Lloyd, of Bury St. Edmund's,
in the cbunty of Suffolk, esq. maketh oath
andsaith, that he this deponent did, on or
about the Srd day of May instant, receive the
letter hereunto annexed from Arthur Young,
of Bradfield, in the county of Suffolk, clerk,
and that he hath frequently received letters,
and corresponded with the said Arthur Young,
and that he verily believes that the said letter
is written by, and in the proper hand- writing
of, the said Arthur Young : and this depo-
nent farther saith, that he saw and conversed
with the said Arthur Youns on the 19th day
of May instant ; af\er this deponent had beeu
served with a writ of subpoena requiring his
attendance at Maidstone, in the county of
Kent, on the 21st day of May instant, with the
said annexed letter, upon which occasion this
deponent informed the said Arthur Young
that he was so subpoenaed for the purpose
aforesaid, and urged the said Arthur Young to
come to Maidstone aforesaid, and meet the
charge and extenuate his fault in the best way
he was able, concerning which he hesitatea,
but he seemed disposecf to come if there was
a place in the coacn for him. And this de-
ponent farther saith, that the mother of the
said Arthur Young being present on the said
last-mentioned occasion, also urged the said
Arthur Young to inform her of the names of
the jurors mentioned in the said letter, to
whom he had spoken, as stated in the said
letter, but he refused to comply with her
said reauest, whereupon this deponent advised
the saio Arthur Younp; to consult Mr. Forbes,
an attorney, and a relation of his, as to what
would be best for him ^o do, and to act ac-
cordingly, to which he the said Arthur Young
seemed to this deponent to assent.

'' Gamaliel Lloyd.*^

that the sheriff of the county is to bring into
that box, to try indifferently between the
country and these prisoners, twelve menj qua-
lified according to law to try them, without a
prejudice upou their minds, and, if possible,
without the least information with respect to
the matter which they are to try, till they
hear it openly in this court. If, therefore,
the object of this application be, in the first
place, the punishment of any man who has
been guilty of any such practice, I have no
diHiciuty in stating here, that I pledge myself
to use my utmost endeavours to bring to jus-
tice any man who can be justly so accused.—
If the object be, on the other hand, to prevent
these three unknown persons from forming a
part of this jury, I say also, that although I
think, in forwarding an application for jus-
tice, I ought to take great care that I do not
injustice; therefore, m stating what I now
state, I desire it may be distinctly understood,
that I do not concur in any censure upon any
of those three persons, founded upon anv
thing that has as yet appeared ; yet, my lord,
I know this, that we live in a country whose
government and constitution is not worth sup-
])orting, if it be possible that any trial of men
for their lives can be conducted with the con-
ciirrenec of those to whom is intrusted the ad-
ministration of justice, under circumstances
that shall leave upon the mind of any honest
inan a doubt, whether the prisoners tried for
their lives, have been justly tried or not; and
therefore, any means which can be adopted,
consistently with the rules of justice, to know
who these three persons are, \ shall certainly
think it my duty, again protesting against its
being considered as any censure upon them,
so far to concur with my learned friends in i
what they have been staling, as to relieve the
prisoners from the necessity of challenging
these persons by challenging them myself, in
brder that they may not form a part of the
jury. Farther than this, I know not how I
can concur and co-operate ; but to the extent,
to which I have expressed myself, I pledge
myself to the country that I will, to the best
of my judgment, execute it.

Mr. Justice Butler, — ^TlMtt is all that can
be done.

Mr. P/j/?ner.— All that can be done is, to
adopt some means to ascertain who the per-
sons are.

Mr. Justice Heath, — How many persons are
there from that hundred ?

Mr. Attorney General. — I find, upon in-
quiry, that the number of the freeholders
summoned from Blackburn hundred is twelve ;
it seems to me, that it is the most proper
way of stating mvself, with respect to the
jurors of that hundred, because the least re-
flecting upon any of them, and at the same
time what perhaps will be the most fair to-
"wards the prisoners to say, that I give up all
these twelve.

*• hau to wit. — ^The king against James
OXJoigly otherwise called James Quigley

" 'Sworn in court at Maidstone,
in the coimty of Kent, 2 1 May,
1798, before F. Buller.*'

" Dear Sir;— I dined yesterday with three
of the jurymen of the Blackburn hundred,
who have been summoned to Maidstone to
the trial of O'Connor and Co. ; and it is not
a little singular, that not one yeoman of this
district should have been summoned to au
assize for this county, nor to any of the

?[uarter sessions (excepting the Midsummer)
or more than 60 years. These three men are
wealthy yeomen, and partizans of the * High
* Court party.' Now this is as it ought to to,
and as tney are good farmers and much in my
interest, to be sure I exerted all my eloquence
to convince them how absolutely necessary it
is, at the present moment, for the security of
the realm, that the felons should swing. I
represented to them, that the acqiuttal of
Hardy and Co. laid the/oundation of the pre-
sent conspiracy, the Manchester, Loudon Cor-
responding, &c. &c^ I urged, them, by all

1S25]

Jdv High Treason*

A. D« 1798.

[12S6

possible means in my power, to hang them
through mercy, a memento to others ; that
had ine others have suffered, the deep laid
conspiracy which is coming to light would
have been necessarily crushed in its infancy.
These, with many other arguments, I pressed,
with a view that they should go into court
avowedly determined in their verdict, no
matter what the evidence. An innocent man
committed to gaol never offers a bribe to a
turnkey to let him escape, O'Connor did this
to nay knowledge. And although the judge
is sufficiently stern, and seldom acquits when
hanging is necessary, the only fear I have is,
that when the jury is impanelled, the ' Blues'
may gain the ascendancy. In short, I pressed
the matter so much upon tlieir senses, that if
any one of the three is chosen, I think 8orae«
thmg may be done. These three men have
gained their good fortunes bv farming, and I
think they are now thoroughly sensible that
they would loose every shilling by a$:quilting
these felons.

** I have seen, sir, that detested shore, that
atrocious land of despotism, from Shakspear's
cliffs, Calais steeples, and truly I shudaered,
not at the precipice, but by contemplating
the vicinity to me of a miscreant crew of 1ie£
lions vomiting their impotent vengeance, and
already satiatmg their bloody appetites upon
my country. Ah ! my good sir, we are safe,
it is next to a moral impossibility that in
Sussex or Kent they could land in force ; the
batteries, forts, &c. are so numerous, that
hardly a gun- boat could escape bein^ blown
to atoms. But Ireland, alas ! alas ! it is lost,
sir, I fear it is gone.

** Here government are now spending hun-
dreds of thousands in fortifying what can
never be attacked; they are fortifying the
castle with out-works, ravelins, counterscarps,
and immense ditches, and they are absolutely
burrowing under the rocks for barracks; it is,
indeed, a most prodigious undertaking, but
absolutely useieu. It is a pity, indeed it is,
when money is so much wanted, to see it so
wantonly wasted, and all done in throwing
down the cliffupon the beach. Remember me to
Mrs. L. and your family, assure her we all ex-
pect a republican visitation.

'* This county is split into party, but I
never enter the habitation of a yeoman but
I see the sword of its owner suspended ;
glorious sight ! But the militia, O Lord ! at
Horsham, Shorehatq, Ashford, Battle, Lewes,
Brighton, Ringmer, &c. &c. I very seldom
meet with a sober man, 'tis nothing but a
dreary sight of drunkenness. Fine soldiers
in action / theit pay, their pay so extravagant.

" I have now as line a sight of the Chalk-
hill opposite as ever was seen. The sun is
setting upou that vile land, and presents an
object not a little disagreeable. — ^Your's, truly,

" Pover, May-day. A. Youno.*'

Addressed, " Gamaliel Lloyd, Esq,
Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk."

Mr. Garrov.— I will take this opportunity •
to state that the witnesses may now retire. <

Mr: P/wnier,— We have no ol^ection to.it,
but we have no wish that they should retire
on either side.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL^^l wish it to be
understood that I desire it.

Mr. P/iD?ier.— There are some gentlemea.
in court who will speak only to character.

Mr. Attorney General. — It is impossible for ^
me to pledge myself that I may not have some
very material questions to ask of every witness
that may be brought. Your lordship will give -
me leave to ask the counsel for the prisoners
whether they mean to sever their challenges?

Mr. Plumer, — I believe I am authorized by
all the prifoners to say, that it is not tJieir in-
tention to separate their challenges.

Mr. Attorney General, — In consequence .of
what the counsel for the prisoners have now
said, I am to desire that the trial of all the
prisoners may come on together.

[The jurors returned by. the sheriff were tbea-

called over.]

Edward Burrow, esq. challenged by the pri-

' soners.

Thomas Newnham, esq. challenged by the

crown.
William Wells, esq. challenged by the pri-^

soners.
John Harrison, esq. not a freeholder.
Thomas Raikes, esq.

Mr. Plttmer. — I challenge Mr. Raikes for
cause.

Mr. John Foulkes sworn.

Mr. P/umer.— Did you see Mr. Raikes at
the time of the arraignment of the prisoners?
—Yes.

Did you hear him say any thing respecting
the prisoners at that time? — He stood pretty
nearly in the place where I now stand (near
the bar), and he inquired the uamcs of the

Prisoners separately ; the last of the prisoners
appened to be Mr. Binns, whom I pointed
out, he looked them all steadfastly in Uie face
quite close to them, clenched his fist, and ex-
claimed, '* damned rascals.''

Mr. Attorney Oencrc/.— That is evidence
that may be given by any body, that is no
cause of challenge.

. Mr. P turner, — ^There can be no dotibt, if
this fact is believed, it proves that Mr. Raikes
does not come here with that indifferent mind
which every person who sits upon the Hfe of
another ought to have ; epithets of that na-
ture, when applied to persons wtio were in a
situation to be tried for their live6,|are strongly
expressive of such a disposition, and a person
who could use them must entertain some
hatred.

Mr. Attorney General — ^We are netting
here into prodigious irregularity, ana I feel
it my duty to protect the gentlemen of the
jury against this sort of attack. If my friend
means to slate any case of fact which he has'

.12S73 S8 IQEORGB IIL Trial qf&Coigfy^ O'ContUit and otheri [IBK

^ pfQ|N80 to the Ceutt^ let hun state that
case^ ftnd let tis have it trM ^ tHei*.

Mr. DaU^-^lt is ikot only expreisiYe of
maltoe, but it.iut'iiisbes a presumption that
the juror has formed au optoion whh respect
to this pftrtitmiar bas(^.

Mr. Attorney G^netnti,*^! must intermpt
tbis aSbde of proceeding.

Mr. Justice BttMsr.«->Wiil you have it
trkd?

Mr. D0lha.^--Yes^ We ^!tfill have ii tHed.

Mr. Justice fialier.^*-The cryer puts ttm in
oindofwhfet i did upon a former eccasaon^
biH peiiiaps this may not come within that
Nle t I appointed two offi<»rB of the Court
ttieh to tty iL Are therfe two seatleiAen
here tlutt are not upon the jury f Mr. Under-
aheriff, point oat two gentlemen #fao are not
lipoii^ejury«

rtbe under-sheriff pointed out Thomas
Watkinson Pay lor, esq. andlsaac Button,
esq.
• "thty Were flwoHi "** tb try Whether Thdmiu
Raikes.. the juror, stands indifterent be-
tween our sovf^eicn lord the king and the
prisoners at the bar, abd thereof a true
verdict give according to the evidence.^]

Mr. Justice JBa/Zer.— ISwear the wiUiess

Mr. John Foulka sworn.

Mr. Plumer.-^l wish to ask Mr. Foulka
^^eth^r he Jaw Mr. Ralkfcs at the time the
prisoners were arraigned ? — I did.

Did you hear Mr. Raikes, at that time, use
any expresMoti rdspectibg any of the pri-
son^ ?-^He inquired the names of Xht se-
veral prisoners s ibe last be inquired about
was Mr. dinns, he asked that question of me |
lie looked them steadfastly atni adgrily in the
fiMMy be shook his fist, and exclaimed^
^ damned rascals.*^

if r. John Foutka crOss-exaimined by
Mr. Attorney General,

Did you know Mr. Raikes befiNre?-*-Per-
flonaily only.

Mr. Raikes is not an acquaintance of yours
at all ?^Not at all.

And you melin to say^ that Mr. Raikes
came to you, a stranger tobim, and asked
you that question, and held the conversation
that you nave now stated ?— Ul^uestionably,
and in the presence of others as well as my-
self.

Tell us who the others were ?— They were
all strangers to me.

t>id you take any notice of it to any body
dse at the time P — I did, the moment I came
out of court.

Whereabouts did Mr. Raikes stand? — Just
where I stand now ^uti tirfort the tor], or
inretty near it, the present arrangement of th^
court may make some difference.

And| standing there, he asked you who
were the prisoners?^ lie asked ne relative

to Mr. Bidns, bavmg asked about the other
prisoners df jersons that were standing by
at the time, t pointed out Mr. Binns to him.

He had asked of others with respect to the
other prisoners f*^He had.

Do yuil recoUect whp the persons were tbat
he asked the questions of ?^I tStnnot tell th«
names of those persons.

You know Mr. Raikes is a person in a Very
respectable situation of iifeP — Utiquestion**
ably.

And you can name Ho person luit ysiirself
that could give snv evidence upon tftis^
aithouah vou heard mt same question pot %A
othersr-^I did not, at the time, mentmis it
to any body that was standing by mc^ but the
moment I came out of court 1 flMstiODed it»
to the best of iny recollection, to Mr. ShnoKnia.

What did Mr. Raikds sigr tA thb other jper>
Sons to whom be addressed t[ueatiDna \ — ^Thaft
I did not hear.

You are a perfisct stranger to Mr. Raifcss,
except knowing him, as every body ebe does^
fay character f*^His person is pcrfec^y iaibttiar
tb me ; I hadoccasran to see Mr. iUukcs not
Ibng ago.

Mr. F/twrer.— *Havfe you the least doubt
abcAit Mr. Raikes's person that this was tb*
gentleman whoib you saw? — I have no dbubt
m the least; I mentioned him by naine ts
Mr. Simmons and Mr. Botane^r, to the best
of my recollection.

Were the words ^ damned rascals^ eK«
pressed in a conversation particularly ad«
dressed to y6u, or an observation expressed
tb himself when the prisoners Were pmnted
out to him P — It was not addressed to me, but
to the prisoners, looking them stedfastly atid
angrily, and bitterly in the fiue, and clench-
ine his fist at the time.

Then the conversation that was addressed
tb you, I understand to be only cnquiriDg who
the prisoners Were, is it soP — Yes.

Enquiring Which were the prisoners, and
after naving been told which th^y Were,
clenching his fist, and making the observa^
tioh ** damned rascals?"-* lie asked me onij
with regArd to Mr. Binhs.

Mr. Attorney OtneraL — I will provt that
he made application to be excused.

Mr. PAMier.-^Tbat may apply either vray ;
if Mr. Raikes was conscious he could not try
them indiiferentlyi that tnight.be a sufficient
reason for his wishing to be excused.

Mr. Attorney GeneraL^ThaX is matter of
observation.

Mr. SolicUof General sworn.

Mr. Sdicitor General — Mr. Raikes, when
I have seed him at different times, has re-
peatedly expressed to me Ihs extreme un-
willingness to be upon the jury, and this
momiofe, as I wis coming into couri^ stated
to me the extreme inconvenience Ihil it woi^ld
be to him to be imon the jury, and that he
had made an spplicatibn to vour lordships
with a vibw not to serve upou the trial.

I2?9J

Jir High Tteason,

A. 0. 179:;.

[tfM

Mr. Justice BulUr. — Geoilemen, you will
say* upon tbe evidence you have heaid, whe-
ther you are of opiaion that Mr. IUike9 is a
"person who will try these prisoners indif-
fcrently, upon the evidence that may be
|;ivea, or not,

f After consulting together, one of the gen-
tlemen said, as the oath is taken against
Mr. RaikcSj) we think he had better be
omitted.]

John Cator, esq. challenged by the prisoners.

Henry Jackson^ esq. challenged by the pri-

/ soners.

John Willis, gent challenged by the crown.

Thomas PooUi gent, challenged by the crown.

Ijuke Pocock, esq. not ptoperly described in
the paanel.

John Nesbit, esf). challenged by the crown.

James Kirkpatrick, esq. challenged by the
prisoners.

Charles Uaskins, esq. sworn.

Richard Stone, esq. challenged by the pri-
sonersL

Robert Jenner, esq. challenged by the pri-
soners.

John Davison, esq. not a freeholder to the
▼akie of IQ pounds a year.

Charles Stuart Minsfaaw, esq. challenged by
the prisoners.

Stephen Brookeiy farmer, ehallenged by the
prisoners.

Sir Richard Glode, knight, not properly des-
cribed in the paneL

James Biggs, farmer, challenged by the pri-
eoners.

Ilenry PawVey, farmer, challenged by the
prisoners.

David Orm^ esq. challenged by the prisoaers.

Wyiiam Cope, esq. ei^cuaed on account of

att.
Ricnait

laid Lewin, esq. challenged by the pri-
soners.

William Watkins, genU ekallenged by the
prifloners.

Joan Leader, esq. ehallenged by the ptiaoners.

RfiMimin Haraoee, eaq. excuasd oa account
of illness.

Richasd Wright, esq. not properly descnbed
la the panel.

James Bedell, fanaWy ohaUenged by the
crewn.

fUchaid Chapman, esp. ehallenged by the
psispn^ra*

Joseph Beamea^ aeq. challenged by the pri-
soners.

WiUiun Child, Bsaltater, ehallenged by the
prisoncfs.

Tkomas Wikoot, gent, challenged by tbepri-
soaerr.

George Biooker, former, challenged by the
pritoner&

WiHiam Small, ftjiuer, sworiw

William Wilmot, gent, ehallenged by the

WUKam Wedd, femct, challenged by the

James HodsoU, gent, chsdlangod by tlif pr ii

soners.
James Mar^r, gent

Mr. Plitmer. — We challenge Mr. M^r^r
for cause.

Mr. Justice BuUer, — Swear the two jurori
who arc sworn to try tliis question,

[Mr. Haskins and Mr S^nall were aworo as

triers]. ' '

Benjamin Rawson sworn. >*£x9un:iined
by Mr. Piuiffcr,

Do you know Mr. James lilartyr ?— -Tes^
I do.

Did you hear him say any thing reepecttag;
the prisoners^ and what.^-^I he^d him say
that he was afraid the prisoners were guilty,
and SQme thing more he said, I do dot recol-
lect what, but he ended it by saying — I bopq
they will be hanged if they are guilty.

Benjamin Rawson cross-examined by
Mr. AUorn(y General

Where do you livef — With Mr. Austin, •
farmer, atShorehaoi.

What countryman are youP^-*-I came out
of Lancashire, I am a Liverpool man.

Whatave you doina at Mj. Austin's? —
Learning the farming business.

Mr, P/iMier.— 'Unless th^ other wttaesa I
shall call carries it farther, I shall wave my
objection.

Mr. Attorney General — Have y«tu had aay
talk with any other juryman about these
trials f—>I have not

You state that upon your oath P — I have
not, of any consequence, I have not heard
any other juryman give any opiaion.

Have you upon your oath been to converse
with any and what juryman upon this subject f^
— I believe I may have asked ene of them a
question.

Who was with you when yoa went to that
other juryman f —-This gentleman was oaea
with me.

What is his name^Austiik

Vfas any other person, any clergyman or
minister, with you ?.— The person I asked wear
Mr. Wiknot, who is on the panel, I was at
his house, where I went with this gentleman,
and I asked him in the course of eonvewatipn
what he the.ii9ht of the prisoners, and be said
he did not thudc anything about it.

Mr. Fiumar^ — ^W'ere you diitete<l by tha
prisoners or any af their agents to do thia'-^
1 was not'

Mr. PfaiMi».«-I de not know- why the exa-
mination is puieoed after II hav^ dedaMtlthal
apiless the other witn«e» (arriee it farther^ T
shall not Insist upon my abjectum.

M9. Attorney Qenerol.^^l wiH take cafe
tha^ iustkse shall be done both to the pubttff
and the 9risoaer», with respect to every indl^

Ividnal that I can hear of, who has spoken
upoa the sul^ect to any juryman improperly.
Mr. Fiumer,—! have no objection to thar^

1231] 38 GEORGE III. Trial of O'Coigli^, O'Connor and others [I23S

at the bar, did argue it, and* ar^giied it roost
streDuously ;* aud in 'Layer's case, Mr. Ke-
telby areued it still better, and put it id a new
point of view. t

My lords, I feel this question to be of the
last importance, not only to the lives of the
gentlemen at the bar, but to the lives and
characters of us all ; and therefore I have
taken some pains to inform myself upon the
subject — and I undertake to »how,

1st, That my opposition to ^thc crown's
challenging without assigning the cause of
challenge, is grounded upon the most indis-
putable authority :

Sndly, That the pretended authorities upon
which the counsel for the crown must rely to
support their false doctrine, cannot possibly
have the least weight with the Court:

Srdly, That, upon the general reasoning of
the thing, and of the consequences which
this doctrine must produce, a more monstrous
violation of law and justice cannot be at«
tempted.

My lords, as to my first proposition, I shall
prove that very shortly, by only reading the
SSrd Edw. 1st, stat. 4.<r>'' An ordinance for
inquests — ^He that challenged) a jury or juror
for the king, shall show his cause." — **(H
inquests to be taken before ariy of thfe justices,
and wherein our lord the king is party, how-
soever it be — It is agreed and ordained by
the king, and all his council, that from hence-
forth, notwithstanding it be alleged by them
that sue for the kinc, that the jurors of those
inquests, or some of thero^ be not indifferenl
for the king, yet such inquests shall not
remain untucen for that cause ; but if they

4

I only wish to have it distinctly understood
that this man was not sent to any one of the
jurors by the prisoners, or any person em-
ployed by them..

Mr: Dallas. — We understand that the other
witness will not carry it farther, therefore we
wave our objection, and challenge him pe-
remptorily.

i AVilliam Everest^ farmer, challenged by the
crown.

Thomas Hogsilesh, farmer, challenged by
the prisoners.

William Walter, gent, not properly de-
scribed in the panel.

William Brooks, farmer, challenged by the
prisoners.

Ileniy Dyson, gent, challenged by tlie
crown.

. Robert Brown, gent, challenged by the
prisoners.

James Sale, farmer, not a freeholder.

Valentine Hakleston, gent, challenged by
tlie crown.

John Rainch, esq. challenged by the pri-
-soners.

William Maynard, farmer, excused on
^count of illness. -
, William Cronk, farmer, sworn.
. Thomas Ralph, gent, challenged by the
crown.

James Harbroe, esq. challenged by the
crown.

Mr. Scott. — I must be chained down to the
ground, my lords, before I can sit here, en-
gaged as I am for the life of one of the een-
tlemen at the bar, and submit to these oiaU
lenses of the crown without cause. My
lords, I beg to read to you what chief iustice
Eyre said upon this subject in Mr. looke's
case : ^ I feel that the circumstance, which is
become absolutely necessary, of making the
panels vastly more numerous than they were
«in ancient times, might give to the crown an
improper advantage, arismg out of that rule ;
•na whenever we shall see that improper ad-
vantage attempted to be taken, it will be for
the serious consideratiou of the Court, whether
they will not put it into some course to pre*
vent that advantage being taken."*

My lords, the crown 1^ now challenged
eleveu jurors without cause. I believe this is
a fireater number than was ever known
betorto; and upon the s^tithority of chief
justice Eyre, I submit that your lordships
nust feel yourselves .called upon to interfere.
But, my lords, if I had not been restrained by
a reason too mighty for me to oppose, 1 should
baveresisted these challenges in the beginning.
Wnm that restraint I am now free; and I
trust* your lordships will not think me too
presumptuous,' when you recollect that, in
lord Grey's case, at a time when the point
waf considered as much settled as it is pre*
tended to be now, lord Holt, then a counsel

* See- Horne Tooke's case, flti^e,.VoLSd.

that sue for the kins will challenge any of
those jurors, they shall assign of their chal-
lenge a cause certain ; and the truth of the
same challenge shall be inquired of, accord-
ing to the custom of the court; and let it be
proceeded to the taking of the same inquisi-
tions, as it shall be found, if the challenges
be true, or not, after the discretion of justices.^

This is a positive statute ; and if it baa
been pretended that the crown may challeiwe
and not be called upon for cause, until the
whole panel is gone through, I undertake to
prove my second proposition, by showing that
this is all mere pretence, and there is na
authority in the law for such an usurpation ;
and, even if there were, the rule pf law is,
that, " in case$ ariiing upon a Mtatute, me etlm-
bUsked form €f Ugal prpcetdfMg earn cmUrol
the itatuie^ hut nnut be corrected by if.''

The first man who dared to broadi
this wicked doctrine in opposition to the
statute, was Staunford, in tns Pleas of the'
Crown (169, b), where he says, <* ^ the
statute of Edward 1st, the king cannot
challenge without cause — But tliis (aiiae he
need not show immediately upon his chal-
lenge (as a common person must, if he were

• See lord Oref s case, aa^^/Tol. 0, p. US.
t See Layer's case, ant^^ vol. l^i^ I3i«*

isssi

far High Tteoitm.

A..D. 1798.

party against the king), but be must show it
when be has peniscM all the panel."— This
}w has thoueht proper to say without any
authority, and witnout any reason to support
it. It rests merely on Staunford^s opinion,
which is no authqpty. Indeed, there can be
DO authority to overturn the positive words of
an act of parliament.

To this opinion of Staunfbrd's, sir M. Hale
and sir W. Blackstone both refer, as their
only pretence for the doctrine (the dnd
▼olume of Hale's Pleas of the Crown, 971 ;
and the 4th volume of Blackstone's Commen-
taries, 353). Mr. Serjeant Hawkins* refers,
indeed, to two cases; but when these cases
are examined, they can have no weight with
the Court.

The first is an anonymous ca^, in the 1st
volume of Ventris, 309, which was an inform*
ation of forgery. ** 'the counsel for the king
challenged, and were pressed to allege the
cause; for 33 £dw. let, does take away the
general challenge, quia nan tuni boni pr9 lUge ;
^utall the court (unt Wylde^whotemnedto
he <f amdker opinion) ordered the panel to
be first gone through; and if there were
enough, the king is not to show any cause."
---These were bold judges, my lords, to rule
directly against an act ofparliament

The next is Ford lord Grey's case, in sir
Thomas Raymond, 473.t *' In a trial at bar,
in an information against Ford lord Grey of
Warke, and others, for taking away the lady
Henrietta Berkley, 30th Aug. 34 Car. II, the
counsel for the king challenged some of the
jurors who were returned out of the county of
Surrey ; and the counsel for the lord Grey
insisted, that the cause of the challenge ought
to be nruently shown, according to the statute
S3 £aw. 1st, called an Ordinance for Inquests;
and to enforce them to do so, the counsel for
the lord Grey challenged tout par-avaii ; but
resolved by the whole court, that the king
ought, by that statute, to show cause of his
challenge, but not before all the jurors of the
panel are called over; for, if there be enough
oesides those which are challenged, no caute
akail be iAowa of that challenge; and therefore
the defendants relinouishea tlieir challenge,
and the jurors find tne defendants guilty.—
Of this opinion is Staunford, PI. Coron. 109, b."
So here is Mr. Staunford brought in again, to
justify a direct violation of the law.

These are the two first cases, I apprehend,
that are to be found in the books that the
counsel of the crown can cite in support of
their doctrine ; and these cases ou|^t to have
no weight with the Court against a positive
•tatute, even if they were less objectionable
than they are ; but when attentively consi-
dered, tney can have no weight at all.

LorclCokethoughtthattheopintonspf judges
depend much upon their characters, and pre-

• « P. C. 580.

t Also reported ia this C<dbction, vol. 9,
p. 187.

VOL. XXVI.

[1834

cedents on the timet 9X which they are made.
The judges who made the first precedent
were, Raiosford, Twisden, Wyide and Jones ;
and Wylde opposed it. — It was in Easter term,
99 Car. 9, 1676 (the latter end of Charles the
Second* t reign). The judges who made the
other were, sir Francis Pemberton, sir Tho.
Jones, sir Wm. Dolben, and sir Tho. Raymond.
The time was 34 Car. II, Michaelmas term
1689, when Pemberton sat as chief justice,
in the short interval between the iufamoua
Scroggs and the still more detestable Jefieries,
and when the judges, my lords, were accused
by parliament, in the words of a g^eat lawyer*
** instead of acting by law, of bein^ actuated
by their ambition, and of endeavouring to get
promotion rather by worshippiujg the rising
sun than by doing justice." Andsir Thomas
Jones one of the very judses who made both
these precedents, was included in the articles
of impeachment aeainstScroggs,^' for having/'
(in the words of tnose articles) *' traitorously
and wickedly endeavoure<L to subvert the
fundamental laws of En^nd." The 7th
volume of the SUte Trials, 479.*

Sir Thomas Jones presided at the trial of
Mr. Cornish, and sir Francis Pemberton at
the trial of lord Russell ; and both these triala
were stigmatised at the Revolution, and the

^'udpnents reversed, by a solemn act of the
egislature, because thej^ had been obtained,
in the words of the leg'islature, *^ by partial
and unjust constructions of law," The 8th
volume of tlie State Trials, 47 l.f

If this is not enough to damn these prece-
dents, I have still mure. This very sir
Francis Pemberton has held two opinions
upon this subject : for in count Coningsmark's
trial for the murder of Mr. Thynn, who was
a patriot. State Trials, 8th volume, 465,} sir
F. Winnington challenged a juror fpr the
king; and C. J. Pemberton himself said,
<*For what cause?" — 5ir F. Winnington.
^* My lord, we take it that we need not show
any cause, unless there be any want of number
in the panel."— lorii Chief Juttice. << Then
we must do him right, and tell him what
advantage the law sives him. Tell my lord,
you that understana English, that this sen-
tleman is challenged for the king; and if the
king show any good cause for it, he must not
be sworn; else he must — and the way for him
to cause the king*s counsel to show their
cause (i^ he desire it) it to challenge all the
rett/' — Now, how does this agree, with thb
doctrine of thi^ same chief justice Pember*
ton, in the base reported by sir Thomas
Raymond f

Behold, then, my lords, into what scrapes
judges get when they attempt to set up a
practice against the law. The act does not
say a word about challenging all the rest;

* See the case in this CoUectioni vol. 8,
pp. 174, et teq,

t Antif vol. 9, p. 696, and vol. 11, p. 454*
X Vol. 9, p. 13, of this Collection,

4K

i d35 j 88 GEORGE IlL Trial of OHimify, O'dmnif and othars [IfM

and here is €. J. PemlMsrlon, iti count Co-
ninesirtark's case, setting up this doctrine of
chaTtcnginn; ioua per avaite, which meass, aft
I understand it, from lord Cok6*s definitioa
(ia Snd Institute^ f96) where he aaya,
** Tenant of the land is tenant per aioaUe^
hecausc it is presumed that he bath avaUt
and profit by the land,** that when the crown
diftlieng&s, the subject shall have the avaiU
mnd pr^t of challenging all the rest in order
1e make the kind's counsel show their cause;
and then, in this case of k)rd Grey's, «ir f,
Pemberton contradicts his own former opi-
Kiion. But the act says, that **the etmse certdin
$kaU to umgned^ and that the truth of the
same chaU(»n'ge shall be inquired of, accord-
ing to the custom of the court.'' Now, what
^waft the custom of the court when this act
was madto? Certainly to 6how cause at the
nime the ehalfenge was made.-^Thenefore
unless the pow«r of the Judges is greater than
thte power of the legislature, all the fud|Us
that ever lived \mt no authority to ahaxe ms
•ct of parliameiC

From this I conclude, that precedents tkpoh
such subjects, made by sttch jud^, in such
^miea, and with such jakting opkuoiis, eaoaot
^sihiy have the legist Weight with tho€ourt.-^
And then the dodiine stands upon the opinion
4>f Staunfbfd idone ; and that Staunford is not
infyiible, I quote what lord Coke said of hilki
upon another snli^ect, in the debates relating
to the liberty of the subject. State Trials, Tth
vol. 150, " btaunford, at the first, wttii my
guMe; but my mide had deceived me —
therefore I awerveo ft^m it : I have now better
cirides**>acta of parHament^ and other prece-
ucoii— these ak« now my guides.''

60 hcFO. my lords, I ^eonVend, we have a
better ^um tMtti 8taunf(»rd ; we hav« the 3Sd
£dw. im*, whidh jposilivel^ says, ** that they
who ohatlenge for the king, shall "assign of
•lAidr challenge a cause certain," without toy-
ing a syllabfe about the whole panel being
first perused^ And ford Coke, whose book is
jusUy 'conudered of the highest auAotity ito
the law, and between whom and Slauniord
there can be no compartsoh, wrote some time
«fter Staunford ; and if thia doctrine had beeb
at all recognised, is it possibie that this great
luminary of Ihe law should not have men-
'ttoned H? atid p«MicuhLr)v as he felt atrott|rly
the importance of this subject; (br, befoit lie
begins to treat of challenges, bt says (in Coke
liltleton, 156, a.), '^ Forasmuch as men's lives,
Ihmes, lands, and goeds> are to he tried by
jurore, it is most necessairy that they be elrnni
exeepiione majares; and therefore I will handle
this matter the more largely.'* Therefare, if
auch a doctriOe as this of StmiAtM^i^ ttad
"prevailed, he certainljr would have tdodied
upon it; whereas neither here nor in any
"Other part of his boofc,>doe8 he say anv thing
like Ity but quite the contrary ; for be says
(in Coke Lilllclon, 156, b.), «• Note, that at
ike common law, before the statute of SS
£dw. Xst> the khig might have challenged pe-

rempteriry Without showing ciniee, but enl^
that they were not good fht thte klng^ and
without beitie Iknilel to iLnv hthnber. But
this was mi^tieVoud to the subject, tending
to infinite delays and danger ; and therefore
k is enacted. Quod de ce&tero, licet per ipsot
qui pro Domino Regii sequunter dicator,
quod iuratores inquisitionum illanim, setl
ailtqui ulorum, non ^mt bom pro Hege, Hon
pro{)ter hoc remAheAht Ih^isitiones iSHt
capiendtt ; sed si lUi qui sequubttit ptt Reg6
aliquos jtimtoram illorura calumhialt fnerint."
(Caitmnkiii) ** atsigoisnt ceHam causaih
entmnut nta ;'' again, my lotds, Cahanfdt'^
" whereby," says ion! Coke, ■ the king is now
vestraided.* So thht lord Coke says nothihg
about the panel beine first gone tfatno^;
aild if I know any thing of that grtet inan's
tharaeter as % lawv^r, ratht^r than hkvepoi
his bSflKl to such a dbctrihe as thst. he woud
have thhnt ft into the fire. I think this com-
pletely gets rid of Staohfoi^ aiitbbHfy, and
then thn doetrtne hasnot alegtbstandnpob;
and H will be curioui lb sbewhat crotches
the Itoattied aibmey wtH use ttpon this occa-
sion.

And How I coine t^ Ihyiasl t>ropoait»m;
and tO^ieW hoW rthich some great lawyeta,
at the time of the ghtritms Rev<^tioo, and
shiee^ have reprobated this doctrine : I shall
first ooote a passage from sik* J^hn HawiOs^
remark imon Vrts-uarris's trial, in the 4lh
volune of the State Trials, 169.* After men-
tioning tiie shameful tricks that were prac-
tised in colonel Sidney's trial, i^nd some
others, he says, * Another art lued waa^ to
challenge fer the king withoot cause, wfet*
no tmat coM fre iAociTfi, such jurors as- they
did not like.*' Thie i^ what sir John Hawles
tells us, and I shall makb great use of it pf«^
sently.

In Layer's case, there is an Irrefh^gslrib sr*
gument against the doctrine, and whio^ shows
the fktal consequences of it in a ibost gterin^
fight — ^Layer's case, the OUi volnme of tU
^tate Trials, UT. t-^Mr. Ait^meg Ginermi z
*< I challenge hhn for the king."— nV. JTetdigfr
** Mr. Attorn^ is pleased to chaReoge faim
for the Mng; w6 humbly insist on Vl thai
Mr. Attorney is to show hiteause of chaflcQgjs
immediately. I own it has beeft otherwisb
in MNi or two late instances ; but-I'siibmttit»if
that practice should prevail. Whether the
act of parliament tntSfe on ibat %tcn«oo
would not be in ttfbci tbei^ abtbg^InK
The act is the d3d Sdw. 1st, aiid*the wMs of
it are, < ti they thit iue Ibr the Mag wit
' challenge tny joitiv^ they shali aasm of
' their ehillbfige k vanse ettUSt, ahO^ttk
<trath6fthesomoiiha& hk wgaMA Jii. wt-
'cording to tb^dMMi of IheCfaait/ Now,
my kuti^ I bi|g leavo to olMrvey tipo6 this
panel there lure doc htraorMimd odeT pei auos;
if Mr. Attorney is not obliged to Show his

' » Vol. Bi p. 4S1I bf-this^b&^aWi.*
t Vol. 16i p. 134 of this CoUectioO;

IWJ

J^ ^hTna^tm.

A. D. 1798*

[issa

caiw of c^Hmwi #)iii )}•• cMteogOft for

tfii^ 4ct of pitf lia^fHiiit m\\ tye of no validity
wliat,99«^^v If tl^«f9 ))Mi h«fiQ Wt. a few
r»tt|ro«d (iMfCDjIyrfauii wr au^ » nMiuher),
ttie^ 4b«re inIgM b^vfl l^fita «oi|i^ colour ibr
goiiig through lh« ptoel bftfor^ thore wa«
^py c^so assini^ for th« chtUknge; but
8H>M thi* iDodiicQ yNtclice \m obiaiiMd to
inalcf 8^ BUfMiPout « fjaael, if thejr are not
obliged to show ^wsa uil the panel is gont
t^^^Mghs Um4 W 14 entiraly a dead letter,
a|id of BO sig^iQ^ocy." — lard CkitfJuUke,
^ You know your pl^Uon is of no validity ;
^e^ cite an aet of jiarHaiaent, and you know
the consist mctice is against you."

Qoof) God 1 what an answer f The act of
parliament is admitted ! but the practice is
set ap against it ! How' contrary is this to
cpeiy . principle of l»w and reason ! I^mem*
oer, my lords, the strong figure of lord Hobart
Quoled by Twisden in Maleverer and Red-
sbaw, in 1 Modern, 35, and again hy chief
jpstic0 WiUnot, io Collins and Blonteru,in
g Wilson, 361 s -r- <' The statute is like a
tyrant; where be comes, he makes all void.^
y^Di the same ponoiple is laid down, rather
ig a cooler manner, by chief justice Vaughan
in Shepherd and Gosneldy in Vaughan's Re-
vorts, 169, 170, and agreed tp b^ chief justice
Parker, in the Atu>fn0y- general «. J. Chittey.

1. in Parksr'a ikpprtsi 44, and sanctioned

I pelied ufpn in tbe King v. Hqg, in l Term

ipqrts, 798, via. ** If tl^ usage haye been tn
construe the words of a statute contrary to
their obvious meaniAg* sneh usegji is not to
be regarded; it being rather an oppression
of those consem^d^ than a oonstcuction of
the slatutfe."

My lords, in tbia c^ae tbere are above two
hundred upon the panel. I ask, then, that
the &pirative expreesipn of lord Hobart, ex-
mnplined by this rale) mi^y beaiiplied to the
present case ; and I think the 33ra of £d w. isK
wiU no loQgftt remaia^a.dead letter and of
90 significancy.^

Now, to show that the Ida^s counsel have
■pne the whole length of setting defiance to
Vie 33rd of £dw. lsft» I will cite Mr. Cowner's
trial; and to show the shamefulness or the
practice, and that tl^ king^s counsel have
aetualiy challenged under pret0nce of cause,
when in bc% they had none, I ifUl cite the
tiial.of Mr. Home Tooke.

In Mr. Cowper^s trial, in the 3th volume
of the Stale Trials, 193,* the panel being gone
through before there was a full iury, Mr.
Gomner said, *< if yous lordship please, the
pmH is now gone through, I desire they may
ihom some legal cioise mr their challeng^.^
9?*Mr. J(HMs(counselibnheking)T'' Iconceive
we that are retained for the king are not
boimd to show any caitt$^ or the cause is
efficient if we say they a«e not good for the
kingf and that isallewedW.be a good cause

"■II I ■ .. M ■ 11 I — — — — <1i^— ^

? Vol. I3y p. 1109, •f thii CoUectioQ.

of ehaUfAgm for what otb«r cause can we
show in this case? You are not to sho«^i
your cause, you chaUenge peremptorily ; so
m tliis case the kin^ does." — Mr. Baroa
Hat$eU : ^ As for this matter of chaUenge
Mr. Jones, I think you should show your cause
of challenge, though the law allows the prisoner
liberty to challenge twenty peremptorily.''-^
Mr. Jonei : ** I don't know, in ail my practice
of this nature, that it was ever put upon the
king to show cause."— Then Mr. Cowper,
trusting to the goodness of his cause, did not
insist upon it ; otherwise Mr. Baron Hatsell,
from what he said, would certainly have
called upon Mr. Jones for his cause.

But Mr. Horne Tooke*s case is much,
stronger; for there that wonderful man, wha
in tlie midst of his other vast attunments,
still lives, my lords, the firm, undaunted^ and
imrivalled fnend and advocate of the old law
and liberty of England, said this :* — ^ I do
not mean to argue with your lordship and the
cotmsel; butlnnd myself compelled to tall
your lordship that I should, if I h^ not beea
over-ruled by the superior judgment of mj^
counsel, have contended tsiy early against
the challenges of the crowo?^

Mr. Justice Bii/ler. — Are not vou awuei
you are very irregular in stating what parties
say ? In every case that you have quoted you
cannot help seeing a decision against you.

Mr. ScQit.^l began by stating, that I
hun^bly apprehended it is impossible that any
Court cau rule minst an act of parliament

Mr< Justice Sai^.— What I am saying is
this« that you are acting extremely irregularljr
when stating what eiuier the parties in Uib
case or the counsel said.

Mr. SeotL^My lord, I certainly do not
i)(iean to do any thing irregular; I do not
stale it as any authority to your lordship,
farther than the reasoning it contains; lam
showing your lordship, that in this caseof Mc
Tooke's, the attoraey-eeneral, under Uie pre*
tence ^ having challenged for the king for
cause, actually challenged without any cause
at idl. If your lordship has any objection to
my slating Mr. Horne Tooke's argMment,'!
will fqrbear.

Mr. Justice Ba/^.— Certainly, any thing
determined by the Court you may state. '

Mr. iScoC<.— Then I onlf stote, that Mr.
Home Tooke's case was this : The panel was
out, and there were only nine upon the jury,
and then Mr. Home Tooke insisted upon iIl
under the letter of the act, that the counsel
must show their cause for challenge. There
were three gentlemen who were challenged ;
the king's counsel showed no cause; andftfa^
learned attamey-geB#i)sl said, if your lordship
will allow me to read bis word&-«

Mr. Justice Bulier.'-Ro; state what the
Court said.

Mr. SccU — ^The attoraey-genend
be had no caus^.

^^

mmt it

* 4niP^ vol. S5, p. S3»

]2Sd] 58 GEORGE in. Trial offfCaigli^, O'dmnor And oHefi [1240

Mr. Justice JBti/ler.— What did th* Court'
do?

Mr. 5coe/.— The Court took the three men
that had been challenged by the attorney-
general. Thus, my lord, the attorney-general,
trusting to the laree number of individuals
upon the panel, challenges these three honest
men, undera pretence of having cause against
them ; and when, by an unexpected circum-
stance, be is driven to show his cause, he is
compelled fairfy to confess that he- has non^,
and to see those very men that he had chal-
lenged for cause ** calumniati^* sit upon the
trial. — Here, then, is a pretended practice, un-
supported by the least authority, and directly
in the teeth of a positive statute. It is as con-
trary to justice and reason as it is to law ; be-
cause those gentlemen who are thus held up
to the world by the attorney-general as men
of such infamous characters that he can prove
them in a court of justice to be unworthy of
being trusted upon their oaths in a cause be-
tween the king and a subject, have no remedy,
as I believe, and noopportunity of vindicating
their reputation. The words calumniati and
caAimntVe are fixed by the statute upon those
"whom the attorney-general challenges: and
h would be itiuch better that the king should
challenj^e peremptorily, because then only the
lives or the defendants would be in danger;
but, now, not only the lives of the prisoners
are in danger, but the reputation of every
nan that is liable to be called upon a jury is
at the roennr of the attorney-general.

Why such an outrageous violation of law
«Bd justice should be permitted, I call upon
the attomey-ceneral to show some good rea-
son ; and if ne cannot, then I call upon the
Court, not merely for a decision, which is
easily made, but for some reasuu to satisfy
the minds of those gentlemen at the bar
whose lives, fortunes and reputations^are now
at stake, and to satisfy also the minds of those
gentlemen of the county of Kent who so out
to their neighbours thus grossly calumniated;
or else to decide, as judges by their oaths are
bound to decide, that an act of parliament
wWch says, « That if they that sue for the
king will challenge any of the jurorsi they
shin assign of their challenee a cause certain."
is the law of the land ; and that it is not m
their power, nor in the power of all the judges
that ever lived, to add words to a statute
^hich are not to be found in that statute; and
that, therefore, the attorney-general, who has
now challenged one of the jurors, shaU auign
tf his challenge cause certain,

Mr. Fergusson,-^! shall not detain your
lordship one moment, but I feel it necessary
that I should rise in support of this objection.
I certainly was of opinion that this objection
ought to have been taken in the outset of this
cause. I was, however, over-ruled, as I ever
will be, by those persons whose experience is
greater than.mine. When I found that the
geotlemeo who lead this cause, were aninst
taking this objection, I wished to dissuade my

friend from bringifag it forward; but sin^ b«
has brought it forward, nncetbe <]uestion has
been agitated, I find it a duty, which I caonot
refuse to my own character, as well as to th«
cause in which I am engaged, to support the
objection, and to state that my o|>inion firmlv
is, that the crown can have no right to chat
lenee without a cause. I shall not go into
the law upon this subject, because my friend
has done it so largely and so ably tltat I can-
not possibly add any thiug to what he has said.
I shall only observe to your lordship, with
respect to the practice^ that at the time when,
according to the ancient and usual mode of
proceeding in summonine jurors, the panel
was confined to the number of forty-eight,
which I believe in no instance anciently was
infringed, it was then impossible- ■ ■

Mr. Justice Ba^er.— Do you mean there
has ever been so small a panel as forty-eight
since the Revolution ?

Mr. Fergusson.-^l meant previously to that
time, certainly: formerly fort^-eight only
were summoned, and then the prisoners could
receive no material injury from the crown re-
fusing to assign their cause till the panel was
gone through, because in that case there was
but one upon the panel wliom the crown
could challenge, without showing; cause, if the
prisoner adopted the advice given by the
Court to count Coningsmark to challenge tlie
rest of the panel, but it is in the power -of a
bad judge — I know that such a tmng cannot
occur in the present case — but it is in the
power of a bad judge to summon such a panel,
that it is impossible the prisoners can ever go
into the cause that the attorney-general has
for challenging. I submit, that according to
the present practice in summoning so large a
panel, it is impossible the prisoners can have
justice.

Mr. Justice Bti/lsr.— Whether the reasons
which I shall assien for the opinion whwh I
hold, may be satisfactory to the county of Kent,
or any other description of men, I am sure is
much more than I can take upon myself to
say ; but such as my reasons are, I undtfubt-
edly shall not hesitate to pronounce tbem
upon this and upon all other occasions, taking
the chance what may be the eSeci either of
popular declamation, Dr any other reflexion
that may be thrown upon them. And I tiave
no difficulty in saying, that I am most cleariy
of opinion the law is as firmly and as fuUy
settled on this point, as any one question that
can arise on the law of England. I will go fiir-
ther, and say, that everv case which has been
quoted against the conduct of the attorney-
general m this instance, is a direct proof m
favour of the power which be has exercised.
I will also ado, that the statute itself is not
against it

First, let us see what the words of the statute

are, that the ** inquest shall not renuBn un-

taken.'* Every decision has proceeded upon

.that ground; every case that has been decided

upon the quostion, shows bow it shall' not

mi]

f^r High Treoion.

A. D. 17M.

11943

temaiB untaken. The panA is to begone
throurii^ and wbeii it is gone through, in order
thatue inquest shall not remain untaken,
the attorney- general is called upon to show
his cause; and if he does not show cause
then, as Mr. Scott has said, the jurymen must
be called, and must be sworn, notwithstand-
ing he has challenged them ; and therefore, in
the words of the statute, the inquest does not
remain untaken.

Staunford, it is agreed, is of this opinion;
but not only Staun ford takes this as a clear
point : lord Hale and Mr, Justice Blackstone
both state the same thing. It is said, how-
ever, tbev have done it upon the authority of
Staunford, and therefore. that tliat can go no
higher than its source.

The .case of Layer that is stated, is a direct
authority against it. The objection was taken
by Mr. Ketelby, and when Mr. Scott states the
argument of counsel upon us, he does not
treat the Court respectfully. The material
thing is, to.look to wnat the chief justice says.
He says, *^ You know your objection is of no
validity; you cite an act of parliament, and
you know the constant practice is against
jou.**

' I have no doubt that it was not intentional,
but Mr, Scott misrepresented the passage 1
stated: he exclaimed very much upon the ex-
pression of lord chief justice Pratt in the case
of Layer; he commented upon it as if the
words ^ practice against ^ou " had been against
the ac^, whereas the meaning of the chief jus-
tice was,- that the' practice was against the
olyection, and so it nas been in all the cases.

Npw, in Cowper*8 case, it is still strong ;
for there the panel was gone through. Neither
.Cowper himself, nor any body else, thot^ht
of making an objection till the panel was
gone through, and after that he says, ** If
your lordship please the panel isnowsone
through ; I desire they may show some lega!
cause for their challenges.'' Therefore it is
clear that the counsel for the crown were not
called upon to show cause till the panel was
^ne through.

In M r. HomeTooke*8case the panel was gone
through before an objection was made by any
body ; and it ought never to be supposed by
anv man wliatever, that a challenge imports a
renexron upon a jurof. What shall we say to
all the challenges that have been made by
the prisoners ? - Do they reflect an imputation
or indignity upon the persons challenged?
Kot at all ; they have a right by law to do it,
iand therefore it can throw no reflexion open
any person whatever.-

' With respect to the observation thai Mr.
Fergusson made, I think he did not quite
consider in what manner the Court proceeds
in criminal, cases. The -judge has nothing
more to do with summoning Uie jury than to
award the rule, and he knows no more of the
jufv when he comes to tr^ the cause than a
child ; the Court issues its precept to the
sherin, and the jury which comes here -is
selected and summoned by the sheriff-

Mr. Fergumn.-^l meant that the jodga
directs the number of jurors of which the
panel shall consist.

Mr. Justice Ba/^.— That is another thing.
Now, ' here are some thinge more to be com^
dered, which are what have happened in our
own time.

It was not said by the chief justice in Mr.
Home Tooke's case, that the attorney-general
was or could be controlled by the Court in hie
number of challenges. In the trial which,
through infirmity, was the only one I attended,
which was Hardy's,* the challenges were
made by the attorney-general without th»
smallest objection on any part whatever.

There are some other cases that have falleo
within my notice. In the case of lord George
Gordon,t no objection was taken by any
body ; the attorney-general challengoci just
as many as he thought fit. In De La Motto's
case,t whom I also tried, nobody thought of
it : and there is not only a constant modem
practicCi but a practice as ancient as the
statute Itself, to prove that the true construc-
tion of the statute is what I have mentioned ;
and there is no case, no period, in which •
difierent determination has been made. It
appears to me one of the clearest points thai
can be.

Mr. JusUce fiiMrtA.— The statute is clear ae
connected with the custom. The words of
the statute are, the ^ inquest shall not remain
untaken fur that cause,** (that is, for the
challenge of the king) *' but if they that sue
for the king, will challenge any of those
jurors, they shall assign of their challenge «
cause certain, and the truth of the same
challenge shail be inquired of, according te
the custom of the Court'' What has been
the custom of the Court I It has been, that it
shotdd be inquired into afier all the panel is
gone through ; so all the cases that have been
cited, and all the authorities that have been
cited, have proved the reverse of the propose
tion for wnich they have been produced*
With regard to the circumstance of haying
more jurors now than in former times^ that is
for the benefit of the prisoner, to give him a
speedier trial.

Mr. Justice Xovrence;-— The question upon
this occasion is, what is the true construction
of the statute? and we have been referred to
the authority of lord Coke. Lord Coke, in
his comment upon Magna Charta. lays down
that the best expositions upon that and all
other statutes, are our books, and use and ex-
perience. Now, what has been the construo-
tion of this stotute by our books, and by use
and experience ? We find in one of our oldest
writers upon crown law, that he states the
construcUon of the statute has been that
which is contended for now on behid£ of the
crown, that the panel shall be gone through

* Aniif vol. S4, p. 199.

t In this Collection, vol. 91, p. 485.

X In this CoUecUon, vol. SI, p. 68r.

IMS] 88 GIOSGS m*

«tniction of it by lord Hal^ ono Af t^ aW««t
^Piiim mpoA <thiQ fftHrn l*w» tpd om of the
BMtt worthy oiid Miiiihle of mea, u^oo wboui
90 maoxiofi oMi ibo cmK vnbotovor m^^ U
upon other meD.

II b^ boca foid ihb motico oommeiiced
in biMl tiiDos, wImq jiia^M lookeci to thq
«tfi^ ann. Wosiofd Holt »uch a mui ? Look
^Itbecanoof lord Pre3UMi, Tbo eouoiol Sx
tbo king cboUoHpd ft j[uror» and Ml Prceton
doaiBed -thai miisq might be shows. Lord
Uxdt mMf << came •» iM lo he shown by ttw
king's. eoMBsel titt 4)1 4bo panel be gpiM
Ihrmigh ; and than if there he not twelve lefl
%> tr^ then IhMF Mt bound to show cause;
thai is tlM bwJ'<i^ .And lord Holt was so
olaar thai was Ike Uw^ that he told losd
¥iaalcai ha wouM not have the lime of tha
Cowl spcBBilqi aasigniog oounsel to argue it
Ttet aaa IkM co«d«Bl of lord Holt; and I
lake il that aomasy let him he ever so fond
of ikkcftyy ar attatbad to the law and const!*
miMO of the oQuntnE. no sathiasself up «a u
yenon B:iore sMachfd^aa he was.

It Jbas beaa said, ttat the practioe w«yi»
kalbraitbo roMhUion* Ho haira mil fer^Mghl
jurors, lliat is a mistake. In sir Heoiv
Vaaa'af ansa sialjr jurors wero netumed.
ttoMtka iieyolutiooi%kuodred were r^turoad
iaiSliAcaao of Jjiimi^ ^^ ^^ oaso of Char-
sock § aqAolhcas, tr^ bafqee brd Holl, wbo»
i :suppoao» direolad tl^o INroiwr nwohrr of
JHKon (and ho wasaat Ukaly to dfrectan ifnt
pnfat niiasher)» ono kundiM and sixty awre
laliimed ; aod in the aaso of Mn TowokiyJI
anhuodndaqdeightk Thecooalanlunifom
paadiaa ia agaUist ihia option* It sceqis
to ine» :llMrefiwe» tel. there if bo ^ound
whataaiBr ^riL ainlbaft.tbo attoi?[iiaR-geaeral
an|ht not to no fot^lo osiigil the i»uso of
ehaHenga till thepaool ia gone thimigh^ ond
Iheii thai. the inqnast oay no| leniaiQ uo«
takan, ho hmMI aseign the cause of kii cbel*
lingt*

Richard fLsLj, firmer, 9^1'om.

William Rapson, esq. not properly deacribed
IP the panel.

2^me8 Cnapple|.distilfer, sworn.

WUtiftni Hoot^ farmer^ challenge bry the
prison^rp.

William Tyler, gent.^ not properly described
ii) the papeL

IphJEi SwfTp gentp^ challenged by the pri-
soners*

^hoTylfr, gept.^c]^lenged by the prisoner.

Jlmes AleX^nder^ timberrmerchant, chaU
4eflgw bjr ^p prisoners.

Trial qfVCititfyt VCmnw and Men ^^^

Edward Worgisr, faaner* not a (reaboldtt.
lidward Whipit(cr| fanoer, challftogrd by tho

crow^,
Bai^aoiifi Fletcher, iiMiner, x^ a fireeMd^r

to the value of tOi. i^ year.
Richard Green, farmer, excused on accouol

ofilla^.
Henry Streatfield, esq. excused oa account of

illness.
William Marchant, sen. farmer, cbolkffgf4

by the crown*
WiUiaqi Hf^es, fanner, challenged. \Cf the

crowq.
Henry Woodbains, farmer, chalUngyl by tha

prisoners.
Ricbard AUouni osq. islialleiigpd by |b^ pri-
soners.
Micboel Sfudby^ ftrmer, sworn.
Thomas 3uMiWi fitrm^, cb|J)ffig|4 Iv tba

prisoners*

John Wenham I^«i%.e99- chePfDg^d hf the

c^wa.
Tbomas Jobqso«» fmmh <f)|allfmg(vl bj }j^

ciowo.
9iM# ^ewvMAt faiiper» swom^
Ijm« Tooilyn* esq*. SFora.
John Taylor, farmer, chaJienged by the csowiw
Thomas Frv, &nneiv challenged by the oowo.
Thomas Selby, esq. challenged by the cnwa,
Thomas &now)eS| ftrmer, chaUeqgfKl Iqf the

crown.
Jobn Tsylor, esq* challenged by tbojcpown.
Samard Blake^ ew^ qot properly dascsibed in

the ponel.
Willioan ^tfiber, osq, cbaUeng^ ^ the
. «wmt

* ••»♦ ♦^ \

mm mwi »m\ ■iiiiji»» wjM \u n.

^ 8eo losd Bsnatacfa cBia». m^ vok IS,
Pfdfi.

t Riileeothoeasoin thUCoUactioD, vol. 6,

p. 148.

In.tfkis iQoHactioo, voL ]jfr» p. M
In. this ^UaetioQ. vol, 1*, p. imt.
See voL 18, p. SS8.

. 1

I

Vh* P/iiaMir«p— A([y loi^y tba awm have
now cbf^lleoged above twenty ; your lon)sbip
will lacoUecl what ivao stated by lord chi^
justice Eyre, in the case of Mr. Tooke.

Mr.. Justice £«^/*-Have you any decision
9f tkoCoun? The mischief, if there is anyt
must ho oonocted by parliament, it cannot be
by us.

Mr. ^/laasr.-— That learned judge inquired
into the number that had been chaUenged by
tbo ciown in ^t instance ■ ■

Mr. Justice Riii/0P.-^He might so; bHt
will you tUfipm ano ^y authoriiSr ^ i^ 8W
dictum P

Mr. J'^ifsi^.-^ have n^ other f^ithoritgr
tbao Ibis of iord chief justice £yxe^ » jud§c 8f
great expervsooe in crown law.

Mr. Justin BuUtr.-^U bo had beard any
ai^g^joiept upon the subject, perhaps he mkbl
have tbouabt agfu^, and bfi^ perceivad luat
the Court has no power.

Ml* JP/twwr^i.Bo oortamly hpd c^HfideF-
odit.

Mr. Justiae. Sfrf(ir«-*fQo oeilail^ly 414 »ot
decide it^ IfioniM QO deosioa upon mt-euW
jociu

Mr. Criwfiq|f>-f-«Lord chiof jtisAsa RyrnqaidL
Fbw.bolouadtbiit soaen ooff bed be^oM-
ternd by thaoovm, tbii th8 inlqlgmt M
Qoiteinobusaa.

I

1«451

Jfit Ht^ "trutton.

A. a* i*796.

[ItW

Mr- Justice Buffer.— Mr. Gurticy, I do not
consider it an iodulgetoce.

Mr. Solicitor Oenera/.— -It is no indhlgenoe ;
*hd h is the grossest misconstruction of iht
act to suppose the contrary.
' Mr. Justice JBtf//«r.— He did not decide it.

MK Dallas. — It was our duty, when we
fdiind it stated as words falling from lord
chief iustice Eyre, to mention it ; it was our
duty at least to bring that authority before the
Court ; now it is disposed of by the Court, we
ftcomesce.

Kidiard Peekbam, Roaty not properly de-
scribed in the list delivered to one of Uic
prisoners.

Biehard Hosmeri fanner, challenged by the
crown.

)ames Atkiasoo, farmer^ chkllenged by the
crown.

fhomas Seabrook, fanner, challenged by the
crown.

Thomas Heobam, burner, swom»

William Fleet Larkia, gent, challenged by
the prisoners.

Walter Bartoa, fanner, sworn.

iohn MiUer, gent., sworn.

John Simmons, farmer^ swoin.

Taa JURT,

Charles ftaskinii,
William Small,
William Cronl4
Richard Ray,
James Chappie,
Michael Sttioy,

Silas Newman,
Isaac Tomlyn,
Thomas Henbam,
Walter Barton,
John Miller,
John Simmons.

The clerk of arraigns charged the juiy wHh
the prisoners in the usual form*

The Indictment wee opened by Mr. Abbot .

Mr. Attorney General, — May it please your
liordship ; Gentlemen of the Jury :— In the
discharge of the duty of the office which 1
liold, I have been most imperiously called
upon to lay before a ^rand jury of this county
the charge contained m the indictment, which
von ate now solemnly sworn to tiy ; and, geiv
tlemen, I am bound to act* according to th^
best sense I can form of my duty ; and there-
fore, however painful it is to me so to state
this matter to you, I hold it to be my bounden
duty to state to you that I am not aware ho«^
h^ia consistent with possibili^ that, upon the
trilirof this indictment, you can receive such
nn answer from the prisoners, to the proof
which f have to liy before you, as can justify
^u iifi the discharge of that diitv, which you
iieve this day taken upon yourselveff, namely,
\b m^ deliverance according to the tmth be-
tween the country and the prisoners at the
1^, in |ironauncin| that they are not i^iilty.
JT'say, it is not v^ithln the reach of my coin-

S^ehljrision what facts can possibly exist, that
in .tbrm an answer to the evidence which I
itave to lay before TOO, if you shall think that
evMencb worthy of credit.

Gentlemen, the cbKrge made bv this in-
dictment is, m the lan^age of the la^, ^trst»
a charge of comj^^hg the Mn^s d^th:
Secondly, a charge of adfiefiho^ to his m^
jesty's enemies— giving them aid and com^
fort : And lastly, a charge of comi>aSsing and
imadnins to invite strangers to invkde th'6
land. With reference to each of these
charges, the indictment hats stated various
overt acts, and I shall state to you, in a Vety
few words, under the correction of the wlsdonl
which presides here, what an ovek'tact of high
treason is.

In order that person)} accused of high nrea*
son may know^ what the charge is that they
are to meet in a court of justice, and may
therefore be prepared for their defence, tho
law not only requires that you should imputo
to them that they have been guilty of com-
passing his migesty^s death, of adhering to
nis majesty's enemies, ^ving them aid and
comfort, and of intendmg to invite strangers
to invade the hind, but it al^ requires tba|
the indictment should detail the overt acts,
that is, those facts, and those circutnstances,
which, if they have taken place^ aire proofs or
that imagination to put his majesty to death,
of that adherence to the king's enemies, and
of that intention to invite strangers and fo«
reigners to invade the land : and it is neces-
sary, in order to convict the prisoners, that
the overt acts, or some of them, as I&id in the
indictment, should be proved : that the proof
'should be made by two teitnesses to the same
overt act, or by one witness to one overt act,
and by another witness to another overt act
of the same treason.— This is sufficient evi-
dence within the meanins of the law, and it
is competent also, after Die overt acts sbited
upon the indictment are proved, to give evi«
dence of other overt acts of the ^aroe nature,
though not laid in the indictment, un the part
of the prosecution.

It is not my intention, gentlemen, to
trouble you with anv farther observation upon
the lew, which will be to be applied to the
facts of this case. If the notion of the lav^
which I am about to statfe, or the inferenoeo
which I shall draw from the facts, happen to
be incorrect, I am sure I feel it to be mjr
duty equally on the part of the prisoners es on
the part of the publrt,— and indeed it dEever
can oe the interest of the public that justicf
should not be fairly dispensed between the
country and the prisoners — I feel it to be
cquaUjT my duty to both to Supplicate those
wno will deHver the law to vou with autho-
rity, to correct mc fullv erith respect to any
mistake that 1 may mak^ in point of law, or
any wrong inference which, in their judg^
ment^ I ma^ deduce fl'om the facts, submit-
ing Ufe inferences froiO facts ultimatelv to
your judgttieht As to the lak, I shall say
only, that I take it to be clear that, provided
the mcfts laid jn this indictment are proved to
vour sati^fattion, they do unquestionablV in
law bring the cases of the pffsoners 'withid

1247] S8 GEORQE UI. Trial ofO'Cm^jf, O'Qmnarand oiken [ISIS

the true, meanlni; of the acta of parUamenty
upon which the lodictmeot is framed.
' Gentlemen, with respect to the facts, I
shall wish to execute thft duty, which is im-
posed upon me in this momentous business,
oy endeavouring, with as little of observation
as I can, but with as much as may be neces-
sarv to connect the circumstances of this case,
80 far as to make the case intelligible to you,
to detail clearly those facts, which, I appre-
hend, will be proved — will be proved by evi-
dence of a nature, the greatest part of which
Admits of no contradiction, that is, by written
evidence. In this manner I propose to state
to you what are the circumstances, which
constitute, in the apprehension of the person
who now addresses you, the guilt of the pri-
soners upon whose guilt or innocence you are
this day to decide.

In order to make this case more intelligible,
it may be useful first to state to you some
circumstances which happened upon Tuesday
the 27 th, and Wednesday the S8th of February
last. A Aer I have stated those circumstances
to you, I shall then take leave to call your
attention to the conduct of the respective
persons at the bar for several days previous
to those days, Tuesday the 27th and Wed-
nesday the 88th of February. You will find,
if lam correctly instructed, that upon the
afternoon of Tuesday the 27th of February,
three of the persons now at the bar, namely, .
the person indicted by the name of Quigley,
or O'Coigly, another prisoner of the name*
of Allen, and another of the name of Leary,
came from Whitstable, in this county, to a
place called Margate, to an inn called the
Ring's-head ; there Mr. O'Coigly came, as I
shall have occasion to prove to you, in the
name and character of a captain Jones. You
will be so eood as to keep in memory that
fact throughout what I have to state to you.
Allen, who came with him, came in the cha-
racter of his servant, which he is not ; and
Leary, who came with them, and who is the
servant of Mr. O'Connor, came as the servant
of Mr. O'Connor, and, as I think I shall be
able to satisfy you, to meet his master Mr.
0*Cunnor at the Ring's- head, Margate. I
shall stale to you presently, but it seems to
me to be convenient for the purpose of your
undirslanding this case, that I should not do
it at this moment, in what manner these
three persons travelled upon that Tuesday
from Whitstable to Margate.

They had not been at the Ring*s-head at
Margate any considerable time, whether a
quarter of an hour, or more or less, is not
Very material, when there arrived at the same
iiin Mr. O'Connor, who, you wiHfind through-
out this business, assumed the name of
colonel Morris, and the other prisoner, of the
name of Binds, who, you will find throughout
this business, took the name of Wilhams,
&nd was corresponded with by that name by
Mr. O'Connor, as I shall prove to you by his
Jeuers, which will be produced presently.

Thev came upon the lame aflernoon from
Deal, in this county, to the Ring's-head at
Margate. In the course of that evening, and
during the neit morning (I shall state to you
hereafter somewhat more in detail the cir-
cumstances'which are the foundation of the
representation which I am now making to
you) they conducted themselves in that house
as I now mention; namelv, Mr, O'Connor
assumed the name of colonel Morris, and Mr.
O'Coigly assumed the name of captain Jones;
Allen acted asihe servant of captain Jones;
Leary acted (as he was) as the servant of Mr.
O'Connor; and Mr. Binns professed to be a
gentleman, under this name of Williams, in
the company of colonel Morris and captain
Jones. They spent their evening and part of
the next morning under such circumstances,
as I have now represented to you.

In the course of the nest morning, whilst
they were meditating, as I shall be able to
prove to you, the removal of all their bagzage
from Margate to Deal, in this county, R>r a
purpose, as to the nature of which I think
you will have no doubt presently, they were
arrested by two officers, who will be called
to you, the one of the name of Revett, and
the other of -Ihc name of Fogion.- Mr.
O'Coigly was sitting in a room, where break-
fast was preparing for him, and there hung
upon a chair in that room a great coat, in the
pocket' of which you will presently be satisfied
this black pocket-bode, which I now have in
my hand, was contained ; Mr. O'Coigly having
slept in a room on one side of that in which
he was sitting, and Mr. O'Connor having slept
in a room on the other side of that in which
he was sitting. Mr. O'Coigly was arrested
under the circumstances which I mm now
mentioning to you; Mr. O'Connor coming
.from his room to the same breakfiut-room
was arrested also. Mr. Binns, Allen, and
Leary were likewise arrested in different pftrta
of the house.

I should have stated to you, that on the
preceding evening, when O'Coigly. Allen»
and Leary came to this house called the
Ring's-head, they brought with them in a
cart which was driven by a person of the name
of Thomsett, who will be called as a witness^
a very large quantity of baggage, deal boxes^
portmant^us, mahoganv boxes, leather caset^
and other matters of that sort, which ^ou
will have an opportunity of seeing, and which
therefore I neeu not more particularly describe
to you. When Mr. O'Connor, under the
name of colonel Morris, and Mr. Binns, under
the name of WiUiams, came from Deat tp
Margate, they brought no baggage with thcoq;
and jfou will permit me to beg your attentioa
to this fact, because it will be mateiidL I
think, for your consideration presently, llie
whole of the baggage was under the eate of
Allen and Leary, as the servants of eeldpsl
Morris, that is, Mr. O'Connor, and of cn^
tun Jones, that is, Mr. O'Coigly, except Uat
some of these boxes, which were omni i«Ii&*

M4d3

\fi>r High Tfeasm*

A. D. 1798.

[IS50

able in their coDtenU^ appear I thick to litve
been taken into the bed* room in which Morris
and Jones slept.

Gentlemen, having stated to you this cir-
cumslanre, that these persons caiiie to the
same house on the preceding evening, and
sow adding, whilst it occurs to roe, that
upon Mr. O'Connor's coming as colonel
Morris with Mr. Binns to the KingVhead at
Margate, he or Binns, one or the other of
tliem, asked if there was a captain Jones
there ; and that O'Coigly was introduced as
captain Jones, and that they all spent the
evening and part of the next morning in the
■lanner in which I have represented, it is
hardly necessary for roe here to observe that,
if the case rested upon this, you could not
have a doubt but that they were persons to-
lisrably well acquainted with each other*
When this parW was seized in the house, I
t*hink yoii will find by evidence that accom-

faniedthat fact, as well as b^ evidence which
. have to offer vou as to their conduct subse-
3uentlv, and atier they were brought to Lon«
,un, that they themselves were so apprehen-
sive that it would be dan^roui to acknow-
ledge any acquaintance wiih each other, that
t^ey positively denied knowing each other,
and that they were so well satisfied that the
contents of the baggage, and the other things
which were seized, were property that it was
extremely dangerous inoeea for them to ac-
knowledge as beinz, theirs, that, notwith-
standing the value of that property, you will
^nd pr^ntly, if I am rightly instructed as
to the evidence, that they not only repudiated
all knowledge of each other, but that they
most positively denied that any of them were
.the owners of that baggage, or any part of it,
the cun tents ofwhichl am about U> mention
to you. I have reason to think that the gen-
tlemen who was apprehended as cblonel
Morris^ was not known to be Mr. O'Connor
till he arrived in town| and the question was
there asked him, who he was ? I state this
because I take the apprehension of Mr.
Q*Connor to have bfeen that which was as
unexpected to those who did apprehend him,
as it was to the person who was apprehended.
• Gentlemen, I will now state to you one
paper, and one paper only at present, mean-
ing to call your attention to it again by*and-
by, which was found in the pocket-book oC
Mr. O'Coigl^ ; when I call it tne pocket-book
of Mr. O'Coigly, it might perhaps, if it were,
necessary, be proved to be so, by trouliling-
yott with asking several questions to ascertain,
ifbose was the property of that great coat, in ,
the pocket of which the book was fou|id ;' bdir
the' contents of (he book itself most decidedly
^rove it to, be the pocket-book of O'Coigly,

Snd they not only most decidedly drove it toi
e the pockctboQk of O'CoigW, b«t I think
yu will find that tliey establish that Mr.
QlCdnnor, under the name of coloael Morris,
and some other name, for I think' he used
another name, the name of Wai^ was abo
WL. XXVl.

the correspondent of that Mr. O'Coigly, as
well as the correspondent of Mr. Binns, who
went under the name of Williams.

I shall state the paper in the very words of
it, and, gentlemen, I beg your most particular
attention to it, because 1 have no hesitation
now to state, stating it always under the car-
rection of those who will give you the law
with more authority than any of us sitting
round this table can presume to venture to
state ourselves as giving it to you ; but I do
venture to state as most clear, that when I
have gone the length of satisfy ina you that
any man or men had the custody of this
paper with the intent to carry it into France,
for the purpose of its being put into the hands
of those to whom it is addressed, and wbien I
have gone the length of doing that by such
evidence as the law of England requires ia
the case of high treason, it is not possible for a
jury, acting according to their oaths, to say that
that individual, or tnat those individuals, are
not guilty of high treason. Gentlemen, ^eat
as the importance of this paper is to all the
prisoners, who may be affected by any thing
relative to it, I think I am warranted now in
saying, that I shall have occasion presently to
read one or two papers; btat more particularly
one in the hand-writing of Mr« O'Connor, tlie
prisoner at the bar. which, with reference to
nim, is full as important'as this.

Gentlemen, this paper is thus- addressed^
and it is with very painful feelings that I
state to you that it could be so addressed from
any persons in this kinsdofti to those into
whose hands unquestionably it was meant to
be delivered : — *' The Secret Committee of
England to the Executive . Directory of
France."—" Citizen Directors ; We are
'called together on the wing of the moment,
to communicate to you our sentiments : the
citizen who now presents them * to you, and
who was the bearer of them before, having
but a few hours to remain in town, expect not
a laboured address from us,' but plainness is
the great characteristic of republk^ins.

** A flairs are now drawing to a ^reat and
awful crisis: tyranny, shaken to its basis,
seems about to be buried in its own ruins*
With the tyranny of England,, that of all
Europe most fall : haste, tlten, great nation !
pour forth thy gigantic force: let the base
despot feel thine avengins stroke; and IcS
one oppressed nation carol forth the praises

of France at the ultar of liberty." Now,

gentlemen, 1 be^ your attention to the next
passage .1 am going to read—" We saw with
rapture your proclamations," that is, we^ £ng<-
land, saw witl]' rapture the proclamatu>Qs of
you, the. Executive Directory of France.
" They met o<ir wariest wishes, aad ren^ove
doubts from the mMs of miUions. . Go «v
Englishmen ^fUl be ready to secetid ypur ef-
forts." So mud> as tu the dispositioa. of ear
■couotryjpeo..

^ "' The system' of borrowing, which has hi-
therto enabled ew tyraiitsiftwturb the peace

4 L

I»SI] d8 GEORGE HI. Trial of&C6iglyr O'Connor and olher$ [ \ 95t

of a Wholt world, is ftt no end : th^y havi
tried ^ raise a kind of forced loan/' that is,
the voluntary contribotions, '* i¥ has failed.
Evefy tax dimintsbes that reveinie it was in-
tended to augment; and the volontary con-
tributions produce almost nothing. The arb-
locracy pay their taxes under that rtiask ; the
workmen in large marniifactbries have
in forced to contribute^ under the threat of

ring turned out of employ. Eveli the army
hkyb bedn called upon to give a portion <A'
'ttieir pay to carry on the war; tjy fkr the
grcbtest . past have pertoptbrfly refused to
eontributo to so base a purpose; and the few
that fakve complied, nkve in general been
eajoledv or reluctantly compelled to if-—
Gentlemen, the wickedness of this paper is
abgrnented in a twenty-fiild degree, by the
SUsebood of it

** Englishmen are no longtr blind to their
man sacred claims ; no longer are they the
dupes of an imaginary constittition ; every
day they see theitiselves bereft of some part
of the poor irmtfent of democracv they hkve
l^itherto enjoyed ; and they find, that in order
to possess a comtitation^ they mo^t m!ake

. *^ Ptflioinentarv dMaimeri h«ve been th^
bane nf our fi^BeuoiA; nattond plunder was
tbe object of every faction, and it was the
interest of eaeh to kieep tbe people in the
4krk; Biit the delusion is natft, the govern-
dient has pnllbd cfi its disguise, s(nd the
nery itien,"-^! wbh this pas^a^e to be deeply
attended t4-«-*< ^ very men^ who, under the
atmbbnoe of moderate tetbms only wish to
dimb into po^et', are now ^d to fall into
tbe raafcs of tbe people. Tes. they ha^e
fcllen into the ranks, and there they must for
^vertemain, for Engltebmen can never place*
eoiifidenoB in them.''^Who tbby are it will
be inctitnbcnt vpoh those to esplikin to ybo
wliD bftve tbb possession of this pftper.

^Already haie the English fraternized
with the Jsvfh abd Scots, and a delegate from
ead) now sits With u^ The sacred f)«kme of
liberty ia rekindled; the holv obligation of
brotherhood.''— The very wotdi of the test 6f
that union which I shall hav^ beeasion tb
tttke notice of to you presently was about to
be created in this country— <' The holy obli-
gptidn of brotherhood is received with enthii-
aasm : even in the fleets and the armiesit makes
aonie t^rotresst disaffection prevails in both,
and united Britain burnt to break her chauis.
^ Fortnmttely we have no leader. Avarice
and cowardice have pervAded the rich, \mi we
aretlottherelbre the less united: sdmie few
of the opulent have, indeed^ by ftpeecbe^,
ptofca^d themselves the friends of demo-
eiaey; but they have notaeted? they have
<;oiKidered themselves as distinct from Xh^
people, ^d* .the people will, in its turn,
CDnsider* their claHnstoit^ Ikw^ras unitist
and frivolous. They wish, perhaps, to pttte
M iti Ih'e frtipl of the- battle; thut, u^
snppqrted by fhe wtelth tl^ey cAjoy, we tsby

perish ; when they ma^r licfpe to rise upon ou^
ruin ; but let them be told, thdngh we may
fall through their, criminal neglect, they can-
n^ver hopfe to rule ; and that Englishmen,
qnoe free, will not submit to a few political
impostors.

" United as we are, we only wait with
impatience to see the hero of Italy, and the
brave veterans of ihe great nation : myriads
will hkfl their antvai with shouts of joy.
They will soon finish the glorious campaign :
tynlnny will vanish from the face of the
earth, and, cfoWned with laurel, the invinci-'
ble artny of France will return to its native*
country, there long to emoy the welUearneil
praise of a grateful world, whose freedom
the^ have purchased with their blood."—*
This paper, gentlemen, you vnll find, is under
a seal^ ^nd it is dated the 0tb Pluviose, A. R.
R G. 6, which I take to mean in the sixth
yeitr of tbe Gallic Re|ilub1ic.

I shall proceed now to state to you the cir-
cdmstances nnder which these different per-
sdfas came from London to the different parts
of this county, iii which it will aUpear from
the evidence that they were, and I shall sub-
mit to you, that those circumstances, con-
nected with tbe other facts to be given in
evidence, will leave nb doubt in your minds
with what intentions, as to that paper, these
parties came into the county of Rent. Gen-
tlemen, the prisoner Binns, who ujion this
expedition went by tbe nahie of Williams^ oc-
cupied the lodgings of a brother of his, a
pierson of the name of Benjamin Binns, who
will Appear to you, upoti tbe evidence, to be
pretty closely connected with the prisoner
OtTolgly, at No. 14. i>lough-court, Fettcr-
kne^ at the bouse of n person of the name of
Evails, who at that time was secretary to a
societjf which has been known in this countiy
by the naeae of the Uonmm Corresponding
Society. MK Benjamin 8ittos being out of
this ctHmtry, the prisoner Jbbh Binns, who
went in this transaction by the name of Wit-
liims, occupied his fodgings at that house.
You Will also find, that shorUy previous to the'

time of which I am now speaking, namely,
Wednesday the Slst of February, a Mr. ana
Mr^. Smith, havlnz in that house one fioor of
it es their separatedwelling-place, the prisoner
Binns hired for the prisoner Alletv (who t^
(H^red in this transaction as th^ serw^t of
0*C6iijgly, when he went under the name of
captAn Jone^)/ hired for Allen b room in that
part of this house, No. 14, which formed the
at>ariments of Mr. and Mrs. Smith.

Uport Ibfe 3tst of February the priMoe^
Bmns left London, as t submit to you, for tbn
piiirpose. of hiring Vessels to go to Fraitoft^aSf
to earry thdse persons, or some of th^tn iqbptt
I, have ndihea, and tteir papers,, iulj' Mfft
other inteilleence as ibey we^stapnlf^''otpi-
itir. He left Londoh. 'He tamto' dttwh ^
Grkvesend, I tDii^k, !rf tbe hoy- ArQci '' '
Ab took the coaeh to Roc&Mei-; *d
ThttrMity he ei£rHo TSitittttui^; "

'^■**' ■",

IfflSj

fit Higk Tre0soM,

A. D. i7ML

JtH

tli0 Fridaj oMnrwog h^ i^idIM bimaelf to t^a
p^rfQQf whQ will be called to you as wit-
ttesic^ one of ibe name ofCJarU, the olber of
MahoDjy and represented himself to have
lome coocero iii what he termed the siKiug-
gliiig line, and eiipffeased a wish for a recom-
^leiSation to soBie . persons at Whitstabie.
And I beg your anteotioa to thiscireumstancey
that upon the Fnday he wnhed to have re-
i^ooimandations to this place called Whitsta-
bie. These witnesses will inform vou, that
so Ibe oourae of that conversation, the names
^f three or four ^vsons, all of whom will be
called to you as witnesses, who live at Whit-
stable, and were the owners of vessels, wqre
tticntioned to this Mr. Binns, that upon
die Triday morning he went from Canter-
Urbury to Whitstabie, and that he there
nw several other witnesses who will be called
to you. With those other witnesses he en-
tered into treaty, and with each of them for
a boat, in the first instance to go to Flushing :
it was represented to him, that he could not
have a boat to go to Flushing, because the
port being m the possession of the enemy,
and all vessels theie under an embargo, the
vessel which be wished to hire womd not
iikve the means, or rather Would not have the
permission, to come back again to this coun*
try; that it was Uierefore an eatremely dan-

ferous business. The danger with respect to
lushing beingatated, a proposition was then
!(nade on his part that they should go to Havre,
to Caiais, or some other place, I uiiok, upon
the coast of France ; ana upon a representa-
tion how eatremely dangerous thisservice was,
you will find, from the evidence of all these
^itoemti the same fact being confirmed by
the evidence of all the Whitstabie wiineaiea,
and by the witnesses who will be called f^m
Deal, and therefore in truth proved by ^^t^
aix, or seven witnesses at least, that Mr.
Vinns represented that there could be no
hasard of that sort ; that he had the jneans of
insuring the return of the vessel ; that they
might depend upon it that the vessel would
not be detained there more than two or three
iKMirs at the utmost ; and that he had so much
in his power the means of securing the return
of the vessel, that he intimated to some of
them tbe possibility of receiving back acareo,
vhich you know in the terms w persons who
amuggle upon the coast of Kent, as well as
upon other coasta, at least I happen, to know
it from official Information upon subjects of
tbiasorty they call a crop: that they mi^t
Jbave a crop back again. They represenung
still the oifficulties of the buuness upon
which he wished them to engage, stated far-
ther tbe absolute ^necessity, ifthey undertook
this business, of being extremely well paid for
it; and you will be so good as permit your
attention to go along with me when I state.this
fact, that it was agreed that no less a sum
than three huwfared pounds, or three hundred
guiaeM (when I come to state to you the
amtenta of the bozei» yiwi wUl see tbe m^te-

rtalily of thift) sjboukl be deposited : it wm|
first proposed that UiJKmld be deposited by
Binns in the hands of Claris of Canterbury,
but It was insisted, un the other hand, that it
should be dcpointed in tbe bank of Canterbury
as a security for the return of the vessel. And
besides that deposit of three hundred pounds',
or three hundred guineas, the veiy large sum
of one hundred and fifty pounds, or suineas^
vifas to he given for the tnp over to Flushipg^
or to any otner of the places which I have meff-
Uoned, in case the vessel came safe back, and
9ame immediately back. If slie ^id not come
iounedtately back, then the three hundred
pounds were to remain as a deposit for the
payment of a given sum per month during
tbe time that she should be detuned in that
country.

Gentlemen, this happened, as I befon
etated, uppn the Friday morning, the 39rd.
It appears, however, that Mr, Binns did not
like these terms; he thought lh«n too ex*"
trayagant, in all probability he thought them
too extravagant, and he therefore return^
in the m.ommg of Friday to CaateriMny, and
in the course of the next morning be went to
Deal, for the purpose of trying whether al
Deal he could ftet a boat, and if he oould*
whether he could get it upon better tenps. I
shall call to you two or three persans with
whom he had conversation when 'he' was at
Deal, upon tbe Saturday morning, and yoa
)vill find from the evidence which they aave
to give to you, that bfi made tbe same sort of
propositions to them which had . been made
to the men at WhitstaUe : tbattbey, howeveiv
proposed to agree with him upon more rea*-
;K>uable terms, and I think a person either of
the name of Campbell or of Hayman, who
will be called, pointed out tbe extreme pro*
bability, if they came early in the next week,
of finding a boat that^ under neutral colour*,
would go to Flushing, Calais, or Havre, for
the sum of sixty pounds, or sixty guineas.

Mr. Binns, upon the Saturday evening, re-
turned again to Canterbury, and I now bet
leave to remind you that it mav be materiiS
that you should recollect that tne first placfe
he went to was WhitaUble, for, in the coo-
versations whkh passed at Whttttable, and
the conversations which passed at Deal, you
will find that Mr. Binns stated, that three or
four persons, who. had a concern in this traos^
action, would be at Whitatable on the Sunday
evening. When Mr. Binns got to Canteiw
bury on the Saturday evening, under the idea
that he might get to London before the pert-
sons that were concerned with him in this
I transaction shouM set out firom London; h^
went up fr6m Canterbury to London, I b«-
lieve in theCantevbtary coach, but did not ar-
rive in London time enou^ to be there be-
fore colonel Morris and his servant, that is,
Mr. O'Connor and bis servant, and captain
Jones, that is Mr. O'Coigly, and bis servant,
were on board the Whitstabie hoy, and had
8mM timm Vm Jowi^r stairs For the puiv

ISftS] S8 6EOBOE m. Trial of (T Co^jf, (y Connor. and othgrt [IiS6

pose 'of your undentandtfig tbis case, it be-
cumes necessary for me here, gentleroen, to
state to you, before I mention the transac-
tions of the Sunday, the transactions of the
Saturday, as far as the^ relate to the prisoners,
other than Binns, who assumed the name of
IViUiams. It will appear in the evidence that
Hr. O'Connor had a lodging in 8trat ton-street,
which is at the west end of London ; it will
appear also that he was intimate with a per-
soo of the name of Bell who lived in Chaiter-
liouse square, and that he occasionally dined
with that gentleman, that he occasionaliv
slept at that gentleman's house, and it will
likewise appear to you, that Mr. O'Coigly, in-
troduced as captain Jones, occasionally dined
at that house with Mr. O'Connor. Upon the
Saturday, previous to the Sunday, when they
came down together in the Whitstable hoy,
JMLr. O'Connor and Mr. O'Coigly, the latter
under the name of captain Jones, dined to-
gether with Mr. Bell, of Charter-house square ;
that evening Mr. O'Connor slept at Mr.
Bell's ; that evening Mr. O'Coigly slept, under
the name of captain Jones, at No. 14, Plough-
court, the house of Evans, in which lodgings
had been taken for Allen, who personated the
servant of Mr. O'Coigly, assuming the name
of captain Jones, but who was not his ser-
vant { and it will be proved to you that Mr.
O'Coigly^ who the next morning went down
to Whitstable, under the name and appear-
ance of captain Jones, slept on the Saturday
night in the same bed, I think, at least in the
mme room, with Allen, who, upon the Sun-
day, personated the servant of captain Jones ;
we therefore bring together, you see, on the
Saturday, Mr. O'Coigly and Mr. O'Connor,
dining at Mr. Bell's, where Mr. O'Coigly had
often dined under the name of Jones; and
?^9 bring together on the Saturday night, Mr.
0[Cdigly, under the name of captain Jones,
with Allen, who personated his servant, the
next day sleeping in the same room, the lodg*
log of Alien, at No. 14, Plough-court, Fetter-
lane, and they slept in the room, which, in
that' bouse, had been let to Benjamin Binns,
the ))rother of John Binns, who now is at the
bar, and who assumed the name of Williams,
and which room John Binns had occupied in
the absence of bis brother Benjamin.

• Gentiemen, I should here ^tate to you, be-
ibre I bring the parties together in the Whit-
«laUe hoy on the Sunday, that Mr. O'Connor,
who, in this transaction, generally went l^
the mime of colonel Moais, wrote or addressed
the folbwjng leUer to Mr. WUliam Williams,
at the Foiintun-inn, St. Margaret's-street,
Canterbury ; you will see that it is quite clear
4hiit the parties, who went from London, ex-
pected to meet Binns at Whitstable ; that it
IS quite clear that Binns caine to Umm with
the intent to go. with tbcm to. Whitstable, or
to go with them to Deal ; but not arriving in
time, they had gone off in the hoy m>m
Towbr. stairs to WhiUtable, expecting to find
hini there; and I vill gire you an account of

his journey after th«m prtMbUy.-^n lb^
Saturday afternoon, at Mr. Bell's, Mr. OX}oti-
nor, after Mr. O'Coigly utider the name of
Jones had dined wKh htm at Mr. Bell's, de-
sired Mr. Bell to address a letter, which be
produced to him, without any address upon
the back of it, to Mr. William Williams
Fountain inn, St. Margaret-street, Canter-
bury ; Mr. Bell, at the instance of Mr. CCon-
nor) did address that letter to Mr. William
Williams; it was afterwards found uDon Wil-
liams, that is, upon Binns, and it will be veri-
fied to you to be the same letter, and it is in
these terms :-*

'< Dear Friend ; — I set off to-morrow morn-
ing in a W^hitstable boy, and hope to be at
Whitstable by night, if the wina is fur ; I
shall take all the parcels you speak of with
me. — Your's sincerely.''

Now, gentlemen, what do you think is the
name at the bottom of this letter, which the.
prisoner, Mr. O'Connor, desired Mr. Bell to
address for him ?

** Your's siacerelyy Jamcs Walus.

" I get your letters."

This is dated London, the 94th of February,
the day preceding the Sunday on which they
were to meet, x ou will find that the bae-

gage, which was put on board the Whitstame
ov, was carried from Bell's house to the
Whitstable hoy, by two servants of Mr. Bell,
who, if it be necessaty, can be called ; indeed;
as they have but a short word lo staia to you
upon that matter, I shall call them. Mr.
O'Connor and Leary, on Sunday morning,
went from the house of Mr. Bell to the Whit-
stable hoy, Mr. O'Coigly and A Hen, under the
characters of captain Jones and his servant,
having slept together in the bed of Mr. Binns,
on the Saturday night, were called by the
watchman, to whom they promised a small
sum of money for calling them up early in
the morning, and they went together frOm
Evans's in Plough- court, at five in the room*
ing, on board a small brig or vessel which Jay
near the Whitstable hoy, and, upon Mr.
O'Connor, and Leary his servant^ coming on
board the hoy, 0'Cyc>igly and Allen came on
board also from the brig as captain Jones and
his servant, and these four proceeded down
the river till they came to Whitstable, in the
evening of the Sunday. It will be stated to
you what bs^gage they had on board ; the
baggage which was on board will be traced
from on board to the Bear and Key inn, Whit-
stable, and will be traced from thence to the.
house at Margate, where it was seized. You
will hear the witnesses speak to the de-
meanour of these persons, what care and
anxiety they manifested about particular parts
of this baggage ; and you will hear what parts
of the baggage were taken on shore that,
night, and what were noX taken on shore till
the next morning; toqie parcels, of'whkb.
the prisoners seemed lo be partkntorly ewe-
ful, were taken on shof«|'by, I)be]iciE)e,'Mr;

1857J

fof High Triason.

A. D. 1798.

[1858

O'CoDfior and by Mr. O'Coigly, assuming the
names of coIomI Morris and captain Jones,
the rest of the baggage remained on board
till it was lamied the next day, together with
Allen and Leary the servants, and was
searched in the manner I shall state, by Mr.
King, who was the land-waiter at Whitstable.
Havmg brought from Tower-stairs Mr. O'Con-
nor and Mr. O'Coigly, under those names,
you will find that they, who, if 1 am rightly
mstructed, denied all knowledge of each
other, upon the important occasion I have
before mentioned, that they went to the Bear
and Key at WhitsUble together, that at the
Bear and Key, as Allen and Mr. O'Coigly had
slept together in the same room on Saturday
night, so these two gentlemen, Mr. O'Connor
and Mr. O'Coigly slept together in the same
room at the Bear and Key mn, at Whitstable,
on the Sunday night ; and you will have evi*
dence that, in the course of that ni^ht, they
were overheard counting money, ana holdine
a conversation about that money, the parti-
culars of which the witness that I shall call,
will state.

Gentlemen, when these four persons eot
to Whitstable, they did not find there that
Mr. Binns, who went under the name of
Williams, whom they expected to find there ;
and Williams, when he came to town, not
finding them in town, immediately set out on
boaiKl the hoy to Gravesend. At Gravesend
he applied to a person of tho name of Assiter :
that man procured him a horse from an ac-
quaintance of his, in the town of Gravesend ;
and he came in the course of that evening
•gain to Canterbury, to the Sun inn, kept by
a person of the name of Nicholas Cloke ;
when he came to the inu at Canterbury, you
wiir find from his conversation, which will be
given in evidence to you, that his purpose
was to have gone that night to Whitstable
from Canterbury, which was about six miles
distant ; but the party to whom he joined
himself, for he there saw some of the persons
he had seen the preceding Friday, persuaded
him to stay there that evening*, he did stay
there that evening; and the next morning he
left the house, coming back again a few hours
after he had left it, in company with Mr.
O^onnor, that gentleman still assuming the
Bame and character of colonel Morris.

Upon the Monday mornin», after Mr.
O'Connor and Mr. O'Coigly had got up, and
before breakfast, they walked out; Mr. Binns,
you see, according to this state of the fact,
must have walked out also from the inn at
Canterbury. I state it to you as probable, as
that indeed which one cannot but believe,
thoue h, strictly speaking, I cannot represent
it as oeing actually proved to you, that Mr.
O'Connor and Mr. O'Coiglyhad walked to-
wards Canterbury: that Mr. fiinns had
walked f>om Canterbury towards Whitsta^
ble ; add that they had met upon the road;
and I think y<M will have no difficultv in in-
ierrin^also from the evidence, which I am

presently to state' to you, that, previotis to the
time at which they had parted, it was asreed
that, after certain other transactions should
have taken place, they should meet again at
Margate. I say it is^probable that these
persons had walked from Whitstable towards
Canterbury, and that the other had walked
from Canterbury towards Whitstable, because
Mr. O'Coigly went back again to the inn at
Whitstable without Mr. O'Connor, anci Mr.
Binns came back again to the Sun at Canter-
bury with Mr. O'Connor.

Gentlemen, this happened, as I have been
stating to you, upon the Monday morning •
the parties did not meet again till Tuesday
afternoon ; and it becomes necessary that I
should state what I take to be the atkct of
their transactions on Monday afternoon and
Tuesday morning: that is, of Mr. Binns and
Mr. O'Connor, who were together, and the
transactions of Allen, O'Coigly, and Leary,
who were left at Whitstable. The baegage,
which I before mentioned, was brought on
shore (and it included all Mr. O'Connor's
baggage, there l>eing a direction upon part of
it to colonel Morris) on the Monday: and it
will be in evidence that one person paid for
the passage of all of them : that oaggage
whicii came on shore on the Monday was
searched by the Custom>bouse officer. It was
represented to the Custom-house officer that
some of the boxes could not be opened.
Leary, I think, was the person who made
this representation : he said that his master^
colonel Morris, was gone to see a friend' at
Dover, and had eot the keys with him ; and
Leary mentioned that his master was going
to the East Indies. Y&i will hear that in a
conversation which Mr. O'Coigly had with
the master of the inn, with reference to
colonel Morris, he represented that cokmel
Morris was going to the West Indies. They
had a good deal of conversation about the
means of removing this baggage to Margate :
there vraa an idea of sending it by water :
that was frustrated by an apprehension,^
which waavery much felt, whilst they were
going from Tower Stairs to Whitstable, jest
they should be, as it was called, overhauled;
that is, lest the bageage should be searched.
It was at length nowever, agreed, that a

K arson of the name of Thomsett should be
ired to take all that baggage in a cart from'
Whitstable to Margate : and it was agreed
that captain Jones, that is, Mr. O'Coigly,
that Alien, as his servant, and that Leary,
should walk all the way from WhitsUble with*
this cart to Margate, alongside of it, taking
care of it till it should be deposited at Mar-
gate. Accordingly, Tbomsett's cart being'
engaged, the baggage was put into that cart.
You will bear what wasthe dcmieattoiir of the'
three prisoners that went with the cart?:
and Thomsett conveyed thie bagaaae, the
prisoners walking along with it all Uie way.
from Whitstable to Margate, where they
arrived, as I befbrettM^you, in the sflempon:

|f6B] 58 GEORGE lU. Triid ofadngly, ffdmnor ami Mm ^ t^M

of Jbe Tufidfty* l^ ^ >B^^ time, I^r- | —th»lasy person who had tbntpockfikookio

* *' '^' hif postMston, coDtainiiig thai Pftpcr, miMi

fe(6l s steal ao^iety to ahake ob all koow-
leamB pt that pockei-hook, and ail conoenioa
vuE Its cooleotSy is a raalUr tli^ I thiok,
cafanol surprise you or any hody who bean
me. When I now atate to you what other
paper was found i^ one of the boxes, which,
1 believe, will he proved to you beyond all
doubt to belopg to Mr. O'Connor, and when
1 state to ^ou ue contents of a letter in the
nan4-wnlin(( of Mr. O'Connor, which has
been found m the possession of lord £awaid
fitsgerald, and which will be produoad here
to-day— I am ^rry to say it, gentlemen, but
it is my bounden duty tu say it, that, vnlesa
some account is given of this matter, God
^rant th^ may be able to give an account of
It, other than in my aniious view of this case, I
can at present form any expectation of hearing,
I have not a conception, even if the evidence
I have already atated were not sufficient in
law to connect Mr. O'Connor with the design
of those who bad this paper in their posses*
sion, how it will be possible to deny the in*
tention of that gentleman to go to France for
the purposes expressed in this paper — I will
first resd the letter found in the pQssessk>n of
my lord Edward Fit^perald, and you will see
clearly from the contents of this letter, that
it was written about the same time that the
transactions { have been mentbning took
place.

" My dear friend— I h«ve had a leAler
written to you these ten days, and have not
had an opportuni^ of sending it to you, you
cannot conceive how it has vexed me not to
be able to find a good, or indeed aiqr way of
getting Maxwell off^'—It will be inoivnbal
upon tlie prisoner to explain this letter if he
can.^M he has been most active to tiy and get
away from his creditora, but they so watch
him, and thb embarso by the enemjr makes
it most difficult, thou|h I think he will be off
in three days Irom this. — ^It is said that lord
Fita-WiUiam is going over to Ireland.'* The
passage that I am about toread, rdalea tn
what we have heard a great deal of— CathoUe
emancipation, and yon will see how friendly
the writer of this letter is to the klea m
Catholicemancipation ! he says, that— ^ great
hopes are entertained of separating the Camo*
lies from the union. This will m your and
every honest man's business to prevent,"—
** and though a few of the old committee

Katriots should attempt it, the people pre most
onest. I received both your letlecs, the one
to JMusatta, and the one by the yoiingaien.
I ahall do all I can fer them^" thatssbrthe
young men, ** and hope with e&ct in three
days. Iftluitfiuls,Iwillmakeitapoitttwitfa
Maxwell that he goes by Hamburgh,*' not
that he goes to Hamburgh, but that be
goea fm U€ aMy of Hambiugh, and ht will
make It a point with Maxwell that be
goes by Hambu^— in a given raao that is
if all thai he oBtt ^ for. the jnungineit in

O'Connor, a# coloo^ Mofijs, and Uf. B\t^
fs ^Ulifm#t went from jCtnterhufyto Deal
without any b8£gsgi» : when they got to De^,
yoii will bear, Iroro the witnesses called froin
|bat place, Hhit the conversation about ffoing
to Filching and V> C^l^is and other places,
^as ipuch pf the saipe nature as that I have
f taVcd tp you Mr. fiii^of bad held, w^ he
w^ t)iere upon the piecedin^ Saturday. It
turned o^t that the person who, it was sup*
posed, would have had his boat ready in the
p^poipg of that week had not his boat ready
the pqiin^E of that >ireek : but there was an
oxpectation tnat, in the course of two or three
^ayf, tht boat might be supplied^ attd a
person wrote down 4n pencil a directioi^ jto a
fpan bt fb» n^ roe of I^ncclot Uaymaii, to
yrbpvk the parties should apply, ^hu they
pjbiQuld have come a second time from Mar-
nOe to peal. That direction in pencil, it
will he proved, was foMUd in the pursis of Mr,
mnoTi ajt Margate, when he was appl-
ied. In what manner Mr* O'Connor and
Ir. Binm went finm deal to Margate I am
unable to state to yoo ; but in point of fact,
i^ I ^off told you, tbey did arpiye at Mv-
gau witnin a miartet or half an hour after
Mr, O'Qwgly, Allco, and LciMfy? h*^ arrived
tnere; w I tlmk, under tbese circum*
ftaQoes, I am fully justified in hairing repre-
seojiad to you tbot they must have underst^,
iphon ^im9 v<^ried on the Mondiiy mor^ung,
that jtbey ivere^o meet together at Margate.
Genjileioen, having now trafoed ^1 these
flMities from London through their diff<Bj:/9nt
transfcitionf till they came togother a^ Mm*
ga\^ I do not repeat Co you the tians^cMooa
oif the Tuesdj^ evenii^ at Margate, or the
Iqmiaotiooa of the Wicdqesday morou^ a|t
MfMVUe. nor do I ilaAe to you again the cir-
ewmftancea uoder which they were aU appre-
Imdod; but I itake leave, in a short woiil, to
deaiiw you to recoUeot what the substance of
tlml paper was, which I have read toyouyond
^ teoollect that, if I am rightly mstnicted, I
^haUprows loyou thatthese persons,beingthua
vmt^ to one common design fipom the 8a-
iMrday nsoming, I may say from the Wed*
Qilday morning preceding the Wedpesdav
momi9gfoUowing,when tbey wereapprehend-
od, thought ipvoper to be perfectly ignorant of
Oifch omrpto be perfectly ignorant of the con*
tonts of the baggage, and the pooket hook,
uid at eiy thins; that had any rehUMn to aogr
^ing in wfaicn tjtoy had been conoemed,
or to any of those tnnsafltiona in which
ikaf had keen engaged, and to rapnsent
tteitelvesaa perfect atrangera to eanh other
thom^ Ihepr had hoen living with Ibis dose-
iieaaiQl intimacsr during the period, tlie Irana-
nBtkmaof whim I bava been rapcesenting to

Wilk jnipect to the frisniiMiiQXIonnor,
H je OQMr my doty to «lato to jm Ihnaeh
stanee of two in^wb, which,aa it appeaia to
lOMnttail^ANr^qpv vmat pKtiMthtf at|antion

12CI]

Jhr High Treason*

three days, sha)! fail, then he is to make it a
point with Maxwell to go by Hamburgh,
" indeed he is in the greatest impatience tu
be off. The man of consideration told roe he
heard the government here had intercepted
a dispatch from France for Ireland, which
promised great assistance : they are here in

treat consternation;'* — this passage tallies
ery much with some pat'ts of the address I
read, — *• the money and their commerce are
^ery low. The black terrier and his little
brother, are but sorry curs : the latter has
become a land-broker, and, if I am rightly
informed, haa found the little priest, and the
suf^r baker, and many others have sent him
fheir money to lay out for them, and thus to
have their agent, they have been at work,
Chevalier was the person who wrote to rby
friend " — Gentlemen, I must submit it to you
whether this passage also docs not connect
itself with the address, which I have read to
you^jis to a certain set of men who are sup-
posed to have fallen into contempt '* Che-
valier was the peraon who wrote to my friend
to have nothing to do with Nicholson or her
set, for that they had fallen into contempt
from the appearance they cut I send two
copies of the pamphlet, but they must not be
let out of the room you and Pamela read
them in, until you bear from me, as otherwise
I should be in limbo : there is not one out
here, nor will there imiil I can do it in safety ;
yoo can have an edition printed in Ireland.
I shall send you a hundred copies.- for
the instant, they are to be sold at three
sbinings nnd sixpence, and of course not to
be given to any that cannot be depended on
to avoid prosecution." Gentlemen, I call
your attention, and that of the Court most
particularlj^ to the next nassa^e — <' the instant
I get to Williams you snail near from me, I
mean to be as active as I can."

When I first read this over, 1 thought the
^brd WWiamt meant Binns, but, in a part of
Mr.O*Connor*s razor case was found a very
curious paper, a copy of which I have now
hi my hilnd, the original of which will be
produced to you. It is obvious from the text
and terms of this letter that it is written in
what secret correspondents call a cypher —
yon have the Black Terrier; you have— the
man of consideration — you have Nicholson
and her set ^ the sugar baker — the land
broker: and various phrases, which you do
not understand, but you have an explanation
of that irarticular expression, '< The instant I
£et to William^ Vou shall hear* from me,**
for the pape^ thatl am going to i^ad appears
^ mc to be demonstration that WithatM,
meant Vtano$, and that Farit was to be the
plafce of this gentleman's residence.— The first
Vbrd in it if France— the nett ifi Spain : the
drird w6rd in it is Holland ; and then It goes
<bh>iigh a great variety of th^ bnding places
of Ireland^ and ftome of England, whicn you
^H! bear i^ad to you. — to one column it
eontains the names of ^ffferent countries

A. D. 1798. ili^i

and persons, and in an opposite colutiin It
gives the names of the different tountriel
and persons, as they are to b« repres^ted itt
the correspondence, which was to take pUce,
The first word is France —the correspondent
word is ffiV/ianu— towards the close of thi
paper is the word Parts — the correspondent
term to Paris is this place.

Now, when this letter to my lord Edti^afd
Fitzgerald informs him that, wben the wrheY
gets to Willittmi, he should hear from bin),
that he would be as active as he can,, and
when this paper informs you that Williami '
means France^ and that Partt means fAap/ac^
(Parit can only mean this place when a
person is usiu^ the words who is writing
from Paris), is it possible, gentlemen, if
these circumstances should be made out to
your satisfaction, if it shall also be proved, as ii
will, if I am rightly instnicted (I state only ii
I am rightly instructed, for I can only statd
to you the effect of evidence, as it is rfepr^
sented to mc), if it shall be proved that Mr,
O'Connor had the sort of connexion in thia
transaction of O'Coigly's which I haVe slated
to you he had ; if this letter proves to ydil
that he was going to France ; if the letter
addressed to tne Executive Directory provesj,
from the very contents of it, that it ^as to go
to France : if I prove to you that Mr. O'Coonoi'
is corresponding with a roan who is hiring
boats in different parts of the county of Kent«
to go to France ; if I prove that he isnot only
corresponding with that man, but if 1 prove
also, as I shal] to demonstration, that he was
corresponding in writing with Mr. CCoigly^,
who had the address in his pocket-book; ii
all this shall be proved is it possible that any
such case as this can be attempted in defence^
namely, that although it is beyond dispute
that some persons must be guilty in this
case, yet tliat Mr. O'Connor cannot be con-
nected with Mr. 0*Coigly's intention f I
say bevond dispute that some persons must
be guilty, because, when I have proved the
contents of the paper in that pocket book^
and that it was Mr. O'Coigly's pocket-boolL
there can be no doubt of that fact : and thai
under these circumstances you ought to infer*
that Mr O'Connor was privy to the design of
sending this paper to France, as well as the
others who were acting with him, I take tfij
be a proposition which I am fully warrantedi^
by every principle of law, and rule of evidence^
to submit to your consideration. ^ .

J* JTic contents of the baggage will be par^>;
cularfy stated to you; you will find colonel
Morri^s andcaptaln Jones's military dresses^
you will find id two boxes a considerable
quantitV of money, principally louis d'ors^
part of it guineas, but to the amount in
monies sterling of about POO/, or ICKK)/. Gen-
tlemen, abolher question which you will have
to address to your cciis^iences is thiq, wat
this brcyperty of so little worth tHat ii should
be abandoned by these gentlemen, by ona
and alt of them, unless they had been con-

i 263] 3« G^OKGE HL Trial of 0\Coigfy, O'Connor and olhm [;1264

:»cipus that, together with that property,
something else was to be found, the produc-
tion of which, as theirs* was dangerous ?

The contents too of the money box in par-
ticular will prove, as strongly as any thing,
the connection between Mr. O'Coigly and
Mr. O'Connor. In the first place i think I
shall prove to you, that every shilling of that
money, except about 97/. was Mr. O'Connor's.
If I prove to you that it was ail Mr. O'Con-
nor's money but 97/., who was to supply the
SOO guineas that were to be deposited in the
Canterbury bank? who was to supply the
sura of money lar^r than that sum of 97/.,
which was to be paid for the trip to the con-
tinent ? But, besides the fact of their counting
the money in the night, when they slept in
the same room at Whitstable, unless I am
misinstructed, I shall also prove this; in.
deed, as to this, I think I cannot be mis-
instructed, that, when the box was opened
and the parcels were untied, in one of them
was a sum of about 97 guineas, I think, toge-
ther with a paper, on which was written
these words, *' this is captain Jones's money.''
Now I ask, if it be true that Mr. O'Connor
Und Mr. O'Coiglv had pot been acquainted
with each other, now did it happen that there
tame into the money-box of Mr. O'Connor
this sum of 97/., together with a label, de-
noting that that sum of money was captain
Joneses.

Gentlemen, I will now state to vou shortly
the contents of some of the other papers
which were found upon, some of these par-
ties; though I shoula mention to you nrst,
with a view that I may recite altogether the
tontents of the papers that were found, that
the prisoner Binns had left his box behind
him at £vans*s, No. 14, in Plough-court, and
that a person who knew Binns, saw him
with the other prisoners brought to town,
and feeling an anxiety about the contents of
that box, removed itVrom Evans's, and kept
it in his own custody, where it was traced and
was found. In that box was found a paper
which I shall produce to you, and the fact of
its bein^ there found connects Mr. Binns and
Mr. O'Coigly very strongly, as well as many
Other circumstances in the cr.se ; there was
found inlhatbox a paper of no less conseauence
than the pass wiih which Mr. O'Coigly had
been travelling^ in France, and in other parts of
the continent, m the autumn of U97. thai
^ass wiJI be identified beyond all doubt, be-
cause there is his own name upon it, in his
own hand-writing, connecting nim with the
administration of the ' differe^nt countries
through which he passed, Paris ^mong the
rest, he giving in his name In h^is own si£na-
lure, where it stands uf>on that paper. This
is not an Immaterial circumstance^ b<^use,
though it signifies not an iota; as it appears
to me in this case, which particular mdivi-
dual was to be the bearer of thjs paper, yet
you will see that it is very material to prove
Djr thiapapcr that O'Coigly had bcfpre been tra-

veiling in France-^the address to the Execu-
tive Directory, which I have read to yon,
stating expressly, '< We send it by the person
who was the bearer of our former paper.''

There are two other papers which have
more immediate reference to Mr. O'Coigly,
in his hand-writing, which will also be pro-
duced to you ; the one is a letter which he
gave to Ferkios, of the Bear and Key at
Wbitstable, to be put into the post-office at
Dover, and the other is a letter which wiis
found in his possession, and which I state to
you as letters extremely mysterious in their
contents, and which I apprehend, before we
get to the close of this case, it u ill be incum-
bent upon him to explain. I will also show
that Mr. O'Coigly has a connexion with a
part of this country called Manchester, for
that appears upon the face of these letters; I
shall say a word or two more upon that sub-
ject presently. These letters are dated, the
one the 14th of February, 1793, the other the
26th of February, 1798, and they will both be
proved to be his hand- writing; that of the
14th, signed William Parkinson, is in the foU
lowing words: *' Manchester, February 14th,
1798. Sir ; Notwithstanding the severe pro-
hibition enforced by the French against our
merchandize, I am resolved to carry on the
trade at all events;" — perhaps, gentlemen, I
may as well tell you at present, as at any other
period, that it appears, from the papers found
m Mr. O'Coigly's pocket, that his profession
is that of a. Roman Catholic priest : — ^^ I am
resolved to carry on the trade at all events ;
hence I send a confidential friend to arrange
the necessary preliminaries with you, and
take proper measures to elude the force of
that law. If you judge ii necessary that he
should remain on your side the water, to
assist in receiving the goods, be it so. You
will procure him the passports or protections
necessary in your cotmtry. Let me know, as
soon as possible, whether we may venture ta
send goods into the French territories by land*
I think it highly probable ; if so, we shall
have a great share of the trade to ourselves*
Your's sincerely,. William Parkinson." Ad-

dressed, " Mynheer George Frederick Vaoder
Hoop, Spei^le-strcet, Uotlerdam.*'
. The other letter is in these terms» it was
written at Wbitstable upon February the
d6th, and dejivered to the landbrd v ^* Dear
sir, happening by accident to be here, and
hearing of a general e.nibargo laia on all .v^».
sels in the Dutch ports, and a seizure pf our
merchandize ' there, t wish to be informed
eitactly by you, the more so as I ain dbiked
to attend my duty,** — observe^ he ia a Iraoer
in the last letter.— asT am obliged llo attend
my duty as a military man at present, and my
partner baa a quantity. of |;QO(llliust tK9!^y ta
ship and consign to you ^ ^ this viU'^jb^ seol
over by a careful handl an^ tae vm
answer it the better. for 4jp(]^pf- ^^^
if your ansVei* stiQufd It^'JTay^lii
ship, perhaps, arlrebld ({Vlfn^

a

1S651

far HigK Treason*

A. IX 1798.

[lS6ft

ftU hastey to Parkinson and Company, High-
alreet, Manchester. We are verv uneasy
about the safety of the last parcel we sent
over ; lose no time, I 'pray you ;. in the mean
while I am your's, smcerely, Edward Wal*
lace/' His name iis Parkinson in the other
letter, Edward Wallace in this. The address
of this letter is, ** to Mynheer Van Solomon
Strael Van Hacolem, Amsterdam/'

Gentlemen, I should have mentioned to
jeou,' which r now do in a word, for fear I
should forget it, that a bargain ban been madei
with a person of the nameof Kerby, who will
be called to you, to take all the bi^gage from
Margate to Deal. I mention thai as a cir-
eumstanoe of evidence, to show that it was
Ifae intention of the persons removing their
bagga^ from Margate to Deal, to go abroad
from Deal. Without entering partictikrly
into the contents of all the otber different
papers which yon will find were in Uie pockets
of these respective persons, and which are in
their contents extremely short, I think I may
venture to state to you, that there is not one
but which will afford important evidence of
the truth of this case, from the beginning to
the end of it, aeainst these prisoners.

GenUemen, I take leave to state aeain,
under their lordships correction, that where
persons are acting^ together in a conspiracy,
when it is once satisfactorily proved that they
liave all been actinsin some of the transac-
tions which form we circumstances of that
conspiracy, the act of each of them is evi-
dence against all. I take it also to be per-
fectly clear, that if the evidence arising otit of
the acts of all of them, or the evidence arising
6ut of the acts of each of them, as applied to
Hi of them, shall make out the feet oi the
conspiracy against all as laid in the indict-
nsent^ that it is your duty to find every one
of them guilty. 1 take it also to be clear,
that if it sbomd, in the result, be your opi-
nion that, with respect ta vny one or more of
these prisoners, the guilt is not brought home
to hiirr or them, the innocence oF any one
Off more of them is no reason why you sliould
acquit the rest.

\ Gentlemen, tt may be, and certainly must
be the fact, that in this general opening I
have omitted a great many circumstances
material to be laid before you. In the course
ofnving the evidence^ however, some short
explanation will be o£fered, and such only as
ought to be ^ven, from this place I mean, of
the contents of each and every paper which will
be read in evidence before you. With respect
to anv circumstances, the detaU of which I
may nave omitted, and particularly some cir-
cumstances which mav be referable to the
Cpers of Mr. O'Coigfy, as proving him to
kve liad a good deal of transaction at Man-
chester, I do not so through the particulars
'•f ibem now, but 1 shall lay them Wore you
In the oiHer in which I think th^ will be
roost intelligible. When you have heard this
•vidence it will be your daQr, the duly which

VOL. XXVI.

you are sworn to discharge^ to make a true
deliverance, according to the evidence, be-
tween the prisoners at the bar and the public
I am persuaded, gentlemen, that, speaking
to you in a British court of justice, you would
treat with horror and indignation any man
who could venture to press for your verdict,
if your consciences are not perfectly satisfied
that the prisoners are guilty. On the other
hand, it is incumbent upon me to put you in
mind, that if you do owe a great duty to
the prisoners, you owe also a great duty to
the public. I question not but that you will
disoEiarge that ou^ satis&ctorily to your coih
sciences, to your countryi and to your God.

EVIDBNCB FOA THB CrOWN.

John Reveit sworn. — Examined by Mr. Soli"

eiior General.

You are one of the officers belonging t6
Bow*street f — Yes.

Did you apprehend all the prisoners at the
bar?--Idid.

When?— On the 98th of February.

Where?— At the King's-head at Margate.

Who was with you when you apprehended
them? — Fugion, and four light*borsemen
went with us ; there were some other pcopWi
but I do not know their names.

Whom did you apprehend first P — I first
went into the parlour on the left-hand side ^
the King'9-heaa is kept by one Mrs^ Crickett
In the parlour on the left-hand side I found
the prisoners Leaiy and Allen, and all the
baggage which is now produced in Court, ex*
cept one great-coat wnich has a black collar
to it. Proceeding to' go up stairs I met the
prisoner Binns at the 1k>ttom of the stairs, I
took him and put him into the parlonr witll
the other two ; then I proceeded up one pair
Mairs, and in a room .aunoet facing the stairs *
case I found the prisoner Quigley sitting with
tea-thineB before him.

Was that a bed-room ?^No, a sitting-room^
I secured him, and I saw Fugion take a dagger
out of his left-hand inside pocket ; I scwched
him, and found several bits of paper in luk
pockets, which I afterwards marked; as soon
as I had searched Quigley, Mr. O'Connor camb
into the room, I asked him, pray, sir, wh^ib
your name ? or words to that effect ; he re-
fused to give toe any name; lie asked me
who I was, and what! was; I told.him I wafe
an officer; he replied what officer! I said an
officer of Bow-street I searehed Mr. O'Con-
nor, there wer9 no papers found upon him
excepting a small piece of paper written with
a pencil, which was in his purse, it was a me-
morandum of the name of a person at Deal« '

Did you find any thine in the room in which
you apprehended Quigley ?-'Tbere was a
greatcoat upon a chair, on the left hand side
as I went into the room. Quigley begged to
know whether he might not have his break-
hat ? I told him yes ; after he had breakfasted,
h<^ said he was ready; and got up, and put on

4M

1S671 38 G£011G£ IIL TrialofffCciglj/, O'Connor and othen [1868

a blue spencer great-coat. I then took him
down into the parlour below, where this lug-
gage was ; then I went up agun, and staid
some little time in the room, and then Mr.
O'Connor came down with me into the par-,
lour ; whether he breakfasted in the room or
sot 1 cannot exactly say ; I asked them whom
the luggage belonged to.

Were they altogether in the parlour then ?
<— Yes; the direction to some of them was
colonel Morris; thev refused tb give any
account ; none of them would give any ac-
count of the luggage ; they refused to own
any of the lusgage ; I went ud stairs, and in
a bed-room there was a small cloak-bag ; I
asked Mr. 0*Connor if it belonged to him ; he
would not own it ; he said probably I might

■ ded

have put some thins into it ; it was unbucki
as if something had been taken out.

What bed-room did vou find that in ?-^A
bed^room on the left-band side of the st&ir-
I then looked into the sitting-room

case

where Mr. O'Connor and Quigley hau been,
and found that dark ereatrcoat with a black
collar; I brought it down into the parlour
where the five prisoners were ; I asked if the
great coat beloneed to either of them, and
particularly Mr. O'Connor and Quiglev, they
said no. I then took a pocket- took, and
some other things out of tne pocket; every
thing that v^ m the great- coat pocket was
taken out and tied up io a handkerchief, and
I put it into my siae-pocket ; we then took
the prisoners away, ana the luggage, to the
hotel ; afVer we had done so, Fugion, and a
gentleman of the name of Twopeny went into
another room, I undid the handkerchief, and
Mr. Twopeny opened the pocket-book, and
pulled a paper out of the pocket-book^ this is
the pocketrDook [producing it].

Mr. Justice BulUr, — Who was in the room
at this time ?— Twopeny, Fugion the officer,
and myself.

Mr. Solicitor GcMrtd. — Did you find any
thing else ?^ There were some n^ore papers
in the pocket-book, I marked them all, and
in the pockel-book there was a silver stock
buckle.

Look at these papers? — ^This paper. No. 1,
I marked at Bow-street ; No. 9, 5, 6, 7, and
b, I marked at the Secretary of state's office.
• Mr. Justice BulUr. — ^Had they ever been
4tut of your possession, from the time you
took them, till vou marked them ?— No.

Did you find any stock P — In thai black
portmanteau that Mr. Fivey owned, when he
got to Bow-street, there were some stocks.

Mr. Justice B«^er.-*-You did not notice
them tilf you got to Bow-street? — ^The things
were not opened before.

Mr. SotuMitr Genertf/^— Did you take any
.papelv from the person of O'Coigly f^Yes,
arid which I marked also.
' Look at these papers ?^TheBe are the pa-
pers ; they are marked Fivey, No. 1 ; Fivey,
No. 2 ; Fivey, No. » ; Fivey, No. 4 ; Fivey,
No. & ; Fivey, No. 8; this I believe to be the

paper taken out of Mr. O'Connor's purse, Bir,
Twopeny received it at Margate, I received il
from him.

Mr. Justke £a/^.— Then say nothing
about that.

Mr. Solicitor General, — You gave the
paper, when you took it out of the parse, to
Mr. Twopeny .^-f-Yes, I did.

What did you do with the prisoners ?— We
brought them to Bow-street

Were the thinos examined there?— Yes;,
the things were all examined at Bow-street.

Were the mahogany boxes examined there f
— ^No ; all the boxes, excepting the mahogany
boxes, were examined at Bow-streek

Where were the mahogpuiy boxes examined ?
—At the Secretary of stale's office; I wa»
present when that small mahogany box, which
was inside that greei> box, was opened, it con-
tained a quantity of gold.

Had it been opened till you saw it there? —
No : a smith was sent for who broke it opei»
at the Secretary of state's office ; the flat bos
was opened, but I was not present when II
was opened.

Look at that paper [the cypher] ; has il
your name upon it ? — It has ; I was present
when Fugion took it out of this razor case.

Was auy thing else taken out of this little
portmanteau that belonged to Mr. O^Connor ?
— ^Tbere were some silk stockings taken out;
Fugion can give a better account of thai
than L

Is this the small mahogany box tbatyoo
saw opened at the Secretary of slate's ofike?
—It is, I put my name upon it

John lUvett cross-examined by Mr. FUaner,

I understand you are a Bow-street runner?
—Yes.

How long have you been in that sort of es^
ployment? — About three ^ears.

What time in the mornmg was it when yoa
arrested these people?— About nine or ten
o'clock.

After you had taken the papers in the mom-
ing, did you at that place take any acoomt of
them P — I did not mark them there certunly*

Did you take any list or inventory of them f
— I did not.

Did any body else in your presence?— >N4K

Were they marked by you, or by any body
else while you were at Margate ?— Thqr were
not.

Were they sealed up by you or by anybody
else ?— -They were not.

Did you take them before any magistiata
to have them examined by him,. at Manale ?
—No.

Was there any magistrate at Maigate? — I
do not know.>

Do you recoiled beins desired to lend for a
magistrate, and have the papers noted and
inventoried at the time, in order that there
might be no mistake abo«it what papert there
were ?— Probably it might be so.

Was that before or alter tlie great-coat was
found ? — After.

1969]

for High Treason.

A. D. 1798.

[1270

You say you first fouod Quigley in a Foom
where there were some tea things ? — Yes.

Then you went down with him leaving no-
body in that room? — I left Mr. 0*Connor
there and two soldiers.

When you went down with Mr. Quiglcy you
left Mr. O'Connor there and two soldiers ? —
Y«s.

How long was it before you came back
4ig8ln? — Not more than five minutes, I

•"C

ou went into another room you said then
with Mr. O'Connor? — ^No; I went into a
bed-room by myself.

That was before you returned into this
room where the tea things were ? — ^I believe
it was.

When you found the great- coat, you said
you took i^ down stairs, and asked them whe-
ther it belonged to them ? — I did.
. Had you at that time examined whether
there was any thing in the great-coat pocket ?
— I bad not.

Where was it that you first examined the
great-coat? — In the ])arlour below.

Who was present when you first examined
it ?*-The prisoners were all in the room, and
Fugion.

Whom did you find in the room up stairs,
where you found this great-coat, when you
look the sreat-coat down stairs ?~I do not
think any body was in the room at that time
I had seen it in the room.

But you had left the room, and when you
4»me back into the room you found the door
open and nobody then was in the <oom, but
the great coat was lying upon the chair? —
Just so.

Thb was a public inn at Margate ?— Yes.

At ten o'clodL in the morning ? — Between
nine an4 ten.

There were a ereat many people I believe
in the house at wat time f^There were soon
after we went in.

Do you mean to say you took the papers
ffoX of the pocket-book m the presence of the
prisoners ?— No, they were not present.

Then you took a pocketrbodk out of the
g^eat-coat pocket, ana other things ?— Yes; I
took the papers out, and lied them up in a
handk«xhi£f ; there were no papers examined
in the presence of the prisoners.

Did vou keep the papers io vour possession
mftcr they were taken our of the great-coat
|>ocket ?-*-! put them in my inside pocket

You did not examine any of them ? — Yes,
one tliat Mr. Twopeny showed me.

You did not examine them in the presence
of the prisoners ?— No.

Who were present when you examined
Ibem ?— Twopeny Fugion, and myself.

What is Mr. Twopeny?— An Attorney, I
believe, at Rochester.

1 4lesire you will recollect yourself a little ;
whcji yi)u got into that room and examined
.these things by yourselves, was not that
papeif separate Irpm the pockei4K)ok?~No.

Recollect yourself, and say whether you
can be quite clear upon that subject? — I can ;
the pABer was not in4bepocket of the pocket-
book^ but in the middle of the pocket-book,
in this manner (describing it) with some more
papers.

Did you read this paper that day? — Mr.
Twopeny read it; 1 did not.

Did you hear itread? — I heard partof it read.

When was the first time that you marked
any of the papers ?—*The first paper I marked
was when i arrived at Bow -street

What dajr was that?— Upon the first of
March, I think.

Are you quite sure as to the day you
marked them? — ^Ycs, lam.

What time of the day? — Four o'clock in
the aftertaoon.

I believe you will recollect, that before the
papers were marked, some of them were
missing for sometime at Bow-street, and
there was an enquiry about them, and a^earch
after them ?^I do not recollect such a cir-
cumstance.

In whose possession .weM those papers from
the time they were taken at Margate till they
were marked at Bow-street ? — ^The' next day«
the second, they were sent down to the privy
council.

Did the papers all of them remain in your
possession ? — Yes ; all of them remained in
my possession till I had marked them all

Where did yon keep them ? — I took them
home with me that afternoon, and the next
morning they were marked.

Whece did you put them ?— In my drawer
.at home, where I keep papers ?

Was it locked ?— Yes.

All the time ?— Yes, till the next morning;
I always keep my papers locked.

Do you remember whether it was locked
or not? — Yes, it was.

Had you r^ or examined any of the papers
BO as to be able to swear to the contents of
any one before that time ? — ^No ; 1 hadjiot

Do you recollect your being desired to seal
up the Juggaga ? — ^Yes, I was desired by the
prisoners.

At Margate ? — Yes.

That was not done, I .believe ?— -It was not

John Revett cross-examined by Mr. Dallas.

You arrested Mr. Binns upon the stair
case ? — ^He was by the foot of the stairs.
• You were the person who arrested him ? —
I and Fugion«

Was Fugion with you at that time? — He
was. '

Was that before or after the arrest of the
other persons? — I arrested Binns before Mr.
O'Connor and Fivey were arrested; Leary
and Allen were below stairs arrested first

Mr. SoUciUtr Geacra/.— Did you see the
great coat when you first went into the room ?
—Yes.

Mr. Ferguison,-^Did you search Allen ?~»
No^ I did not«

1271] 38 GEORGE UL TruiqfW^iy* OCmwr and athen [1272

Mr. SoUciior Ociier«/.T-Was ^ paper you
marked at Bow-etreet, marked befoic or aAer
you put it into your drawer ?-*-Befbre I put it
mto my drawer.

Edward Fugion Sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.

Garrow^

I believe you are one of the constables
attending the public office in Bow*8treet? —
Yes.

Did you assist the first witness in appre-
hending the prisoners ? — Yes.

Slate under what circumstances they were
apprehended ?— On the 98th of February we
went to Margate ; we went to Mrs. Crickett's
at the sign of the King's-head, in High-
street ; when we went into the house, Lcin^
and Allen were in Uie parlour on the left
hand.

Those were the first you saw F— Yes ; Binns
we met coming down stairs ; we went to Mrs.
Crickett and asked her-^—

Do not tell us any thing that was said to
you, excepting in the presence of some of
the prisoners. — We went up stairs; the pri-
soner, Quigley, was in a room sitting down
to breakfast

Was any body else in the room at that
time P — I do not recollect that there was ; I
laid hold of Quigley, and searched him, and
pulled out this dagger (producing it) from his
left-hand coat pocket.

Was it in that sheath ?— Yes ; leaving him
in custody of Revett and the light horsemen,
I went down stairs into the parlour to the
other three prisoners ; I believe I searched
Binns before I went up, I found some papers
and.a pair of pistols in his pocket.

Were they loaded then?— I believe they
were, but am not positive.

What is the book you have in your hand ?
— I found this in Binns's pocket; I marked
it Binns, E. F.

Look at this paper; where did you find
that?— In Binns's pocket; I marked that
likewise Binns, E. F.

You went up stairs?— Yes, and came down
again ; I asked the three prisoners, that were
in the parlour. Binns, Learv, and Allen,
whose was all that luggage; they would not
make any answer aboutsC or tell their names.

Did they refuse, or did they only not say
any thing r They said they should not say
any thing, or should not answer any questions ;
then Revett brought Mr. O'Connor down
stairs ; we got a cart and put the luggage in.
and took them and the luggage to the note!
in Margate.

Before you took them to the hotel, did you
see any thing of a great coat? — I saw a great
coat up stairs, in the room where Quigley was
sitting, when I first went up stairs.
I Where did you see tbat great coat, after
you had secured the prisoners f >— I saw it when
lievett brought it down stairs with him, when
iie came down with Mr. O'Counor.

By this time all the prisoners wereassc Able d

there together f — ^Yes ; they were asked whom
the great coat bebnged to ? nobody made ahy
answer.

Did thev make any answer, or remain
ttlent? — ^I believe they remained silent?

Did you see any thing taken from the great
coat?— I saw a pockel-Mok*

Should you know that pocket-book again ?
Is this it? f showing a pocket-book to the
witness!.— I did not mark it; it was a pockeU
book of^ that appearance; I believe that to
belt.

Who took that pocket-book out?— Revett
did; and tied that and some other tbinp he
took out up in a handkerchief, and put it in
his side pocket, we then took toe prisoneia to
the hotel at Margate.

Did you afterwards see Revett produce that
handkerchief, with the contents, lo any body ?
—Yes, to Mr. Twopeny.

Did you see the handkerchief opened?— I
dkl.

Did you see anybody take any paper from
it and read it ?-<Mr. Twopeny did.

. Did you see him take that paper out of the
pocket-book, which you had seen Revett take
out of the mat coat pocket ?— I did.

Did you hear Mr. Twopeny read it ?-^I did ;
and read it mvself afterwards.

What was done with it after it had been so
read? — ^It was returned to Revett again, aod
put into the same pocket-book, and delivered
into Revett's care.

When did you next see that pocket-book
and the paper again ?— The next day, Thurs-
day, March the 1st, at Bow-street

Did you mark that paper?— I did.

Can you take upon vourself to say that the
paper which you marked at jSow-street, and
which you saw in Twopeny's hand and read,
was the same you saw taken out of the pocket-
book, at Margate? — I am positive of it; this
is the paper, [the Address to the Executive
Directory of France].

Look at these two papers ?^-Tho8e two
papers I found upon Binns, in his coat pockety
at Mrs. Crickett's. at Mareatei

Mr. Justice BaMer.— What are they?

Mr. GdfT0w^— One is a map of the county
of Kent; the other appears to be a cypher;
the word ^ Claris," bookseller, Canterbuty,
at the bottom, will identify it. After you
had secured the prisoners and the luggage in
this manner, what did you do with t&m ?—^
We brought them to Canterbury, where we
stopped mI niaht; the next morning we pro-
ceeded to London, and went to Bow-street.

Did you keep all these thiuss in your
custody till you nad marked them r — Yes.

Did you seethe paper, which 1 have shown
you, which has your mark upon it, at Bow-
street?— Yes, I did.

Did you then mark it? — I did.

Were you present afterwards when anv of
the luggage which had been found at Mai^
gate was opened at the Duke of Portlaixra
office ?— I was present wl^n that small
hogauy box was opened.

1273]

far High Trioson.

A. D. 1798.

[1874

Wi» it broken open P^It was.

Are you sure that was jpart of the luggage
you fouod at Margate?— >xes,. I aqi.

Where did you find it?— In the lower
parlour on the left band where I found the
two first prisoners.

. Did you seft any raaor case opened at the
duke of Portland's ofike?— I did not.

Did you mark any paper? — ^Yes, that paper
which i found in the raaor case afterwards.

Where had this raaor case been found ?-«I
took it out of the cloak bag.

Wher^ did you find the cloak bag at Mar-
gate?— I did not find it.

Did you see it found ?^I did not.

Have you since taken any Articles of wear-
ins apparel out of this ? — Yes, I took some
silk stockmgs out, which I took to the Tower,
to Mr. O'Connor.

Did vou see Mr. O'Connor? — ^I did.

Did be receive those silk stockings?— He
did.

Bv whose desire did you take those ulk
stcickiogs out of this portmanteau ? — I had an
order to send him some things ; I believe there
had been some things taken out before.

Mr. Justice BulUr.^^V^ho told jrou to take
out those stockings?— I had an order from
iht duke of Portland to take Mr. 0*Connor
some silk stockings and linen, and things;
I went to the governor, he introduced me to
Mr. OX3onnor with the things, and I received
a receipt I think from him.
. Mr. Justice Buller.-^Did you tell hint
whom you came from? — Yes; I told him I
had brought the things he luul written fbr;
he received them, and gave me a receipt for
them.

Mr. C^ofTMi.- Look at that great coat ; is
tiiat the coat you saw when you first went
into the room at Margate where Mr. Fivey
was ? — I saw a coat, but do not know what the
colour was.

Is that gentleman the person you have
been speaking of as Mr. O'Connor ? — Yes.

Do you see the person there whom you
have called by the name ef Quisley ?— Yes.

Look at the other persons, Binns, Leary,
and Allen. Those are tne persons I have been
speaking of.

Edward Fugian cross-examined by Mr.

DalUu.

What hour was it when you went to the
KineVhead ?— About eight in the morning.
• nbo was with you at that time :— Revett,
two or- three Kght borse^men^ a quarter-mas-
ter of light horse, a custom-house officer, Mr.
Sandetson, and another person or two.

All these persons went with you to the
KinAfs-head ?— They did.

Who went into the house besides ^ou and
Revett? — We took Air. Sanderson m with
u% I thtnky tq identify the^ persons he had
seen. '

Recollect whether any other persons went
Into tHe« house with you and Revett beskles

Mr. Sanderson. — ^Yes, several of the Ught
horse went in, and a quarter-master of light
horse.

Do you know the name of that quarter*
master? — No,

Or the names of the light horse men ?-r
No, I do not.

When you went into the house you went
into the parlour on the left hand, where you
found Leary and Allen?— We did.

Did ^ou go alone into that ropm, or who
went with you ? — ^Tbere certainly were seve^
ral persons went with me.

Was Revett one of the persons who went
with vou into that room? — ^I believe he was«.

will you take upon yourself to swear it ? —
I cannot.

Endeavour to recollect whether you can or
cannot ?— I really believe that he did^ but I
cannot positively swear it.

Who was present when you searched
Leary and Allen? — Several people were
present.

Was Revett present at that time ? — I bof
lieve he went up stairs while I searched
Leary and Allen.

If you are not positive that he was in the
room at all, how can joiy be certain, that he
went out of the room 'when you searched
these two men ? — I cannot be certain, I think
that was the possibility of the case, I really
think he was in.

How long have you been an officer in Bow^
street?-^ About nin^ years.

Do not you know you must speak to fiuts?
•—Certainly, as far as I know.

Not knowing whether he was in the room
or not, you now believe he went up stairs
when you searched Leary and Allen ? — We
both together met Binns upon the stairs.

How long mijg^t'tliat b6 after you first en-
tered the room where Allen and Leary Were?
— 'Three or four minutes.

Then you met Binns upon the stairs ? — Yes,
coming down stairs. i

Who searched Leary ? ^I think I did ; I am
sure I searched him.

What did you find upon him? — Some
money, and a handkerchietin his pocket, and
some gloves.

That was all ?— I believe it was.

What did you find upon Allen ?— -Some
mon^.

And that was all ?— Yes, except a podccfc
handkeirchief.

When you arrested Binns was Binns on the
stairs or at the bottom of the stairs ?«— At the
bottom of the stairs. . .

Did Binns make any resistance ?— He did
not.

I think you have told us he had pistols in
his pocket, but did not make any resistance
when you stoppod him at the bottom of the
sturs?'-*He did not

What did he sf^ to you ? — I cannDt recol«>
leot the conversation now.

Did not he ask vou by wh«t atithati|y you
stopped him there r— He did^

1S75] 38 GEORGE Ul. Trial ofO'Coi^y, OTConnar and Okers [1876

And you told him you were an officer from
Bow-stl-eet P— I did.

When you arrested Binns at the bottom of
the stairs, who were left in the room where
Allen ^ and Learj were P— One or two light-
horse men.

When you searched Binns you found seve*
ral papers that have been produced, in his
possession ? — ^I did.

What did you do with those papers when
you took them out of his pocket? — I tied
them uj) in a handkerchief, I believe, belong.
inz to him.

What was done with Binns? — We left him
in custody in the parlour.

Did you, while you continued in the KingV
head, put a mark apon any one of these pa-
pers?— I did not.

While you continued in the KingVhead,
did this handkerchief remain in your posses-
•ion P — It did.

Was it ever opened to put in any article be-
longing^ to any one of the other persons now
upon trial? — Yes, all the money I took from
the other prisoners was put into the same
handkerchief.

When you fint went into the room where
Mr. (/Cotgly was, you saw a great coatP—
Yes.

But whether this is the great coat you are
not able to swear ; now are you able to swear
to this fact — after you had arrested Mr.
O'Coigly in the room up one pair of stairs, in
whose charge and custody was Mr. O'Coigly
lef^ P — ^I did ;not so into the bed room ; as
soon as I had searched Mr. O'Coigly and taken
that dagger from him, I came down stairs to
see af\er the other prisoners.

"Who was left in the room with him P— I
left B«vett.

From the time Mr. O'Coigly was arrested,
was he suffered to quit the room in which he
was arrested? — He was arrested up stairs.

Was he in the bed-room where the great
coat was P — He was not in the bed-rowm.

When the great coat was shown to you by
Bevett, wan it in the room in which you first
aaw it ?r-He dui not show it me there, it was
brought by him down stairs.

Then whether the great coat you saw in the
room below was the same mat coat you had
seen up stairs you cannot tell ?— No.

From the KingVhead you went to tbe^
hotel?— We did.

While you were at the King's head, or at
the hotel, were you not desirra to send for a
fnamstrate, in order that the papers mi^t be
marked and sealed up? — I do not think I
was.

Will you swear that you were not? — I do
not think 1 heard a magisHate's name men-
tioned.

Will you swear that you were not desired to
aend for a magistrate, to mark the pi4>ers he-
lore that magistrate, and have them sealed
up ?— I was asked whether Mr. Twopeny was
a magistrate ; I said he wasa magistrate and

I

he was a proper person ; I n«v«r hmxd any
other magistrate's name mentioned.

Were you or not deaied to send for a ma^
gistrate in order that the papers might be
marked and sealed up at the time P— I do not
think I was.

Will you swear you were not ? — ^I will not

Will you swear Revett was not desired to
do it in your presence ?— I cannot swear that.

Who were present when the papers were
aflerwards opened at the hotel at Margate ? —
Mr. Twopeny, mvself, and Revett.

Then this, handkerchief that had been tied
up was opened at the hotel, when all tlw pri>
soners were absent ? — It was.

Where were they at the timeP — ^In the as-
sembly room.

In what room where you when the papers
were opened ? — I think a front parlour.

The papers were not marked when they
were seized, nor when the handkerchief was
opened at the hotel ? — ^They were not.

In whose custody did the handker^ef con-
tinue till you got to London?— In Revett's.

Because I understood you to say in anawer
to a aue6tion from my friend Mr. Garniw,
that tne papers continued in your custody
and Revett's till you got to London P — The
Inmge.

Then you had not the custody of the hand-
kerchief, but it continued in Revett'a custody ?
—Yes.

Upon vour arrival in Bow* street was not
this handkerchief lost or missing lor some
timeP — It was not

Did you hear nothine said b^ any person
about this handkerchiefheiag missioer—No.

That you swear positively? — I do ; tnal was
another handkerchief which had the papers of
Binns in it

There was a complaint of some handker-
chief being missing, in which jfou had pmrs
of Binns P — I made the complaint mysetl;

Then in how many handkerchief were
these papers tied up when you left Margate
for London P— Two bandkeichiefs.

One o! these handkerchiefs you say was in
the custody of Revett ; was the other in your
custody ? — ^It was.

When you arrived at Bow-street, the hand-
kerchief in your custody was not to be found
for some time ? — It was not

What had become of itP — ^In getting out
there was a great mob round the door, my
wife was there, it was handed out by some
person, and they thought it was min^ and
gave it my wife, and it was five or ten nunules
before the handkerchief was found.

When the handkerchief was missinig, did
not the magistrate direct all the pisoners U>
be searched to see if they had itr-*I did not
hear any such order.

Nor see it done ?— I did not

Edward Fugion cross-examined by Mr.

Gumey,

You were asked for your, authorial and jou

1277]

fir High Treason,

told them you were a Bow-street officer, and
that you iotended to take them toBow-street,
or to the Secretary of state's ? — I did.
Did they not say they should answer no

Suestions till they came before a proper au-
liority ?— They did.

Edward Fugion cross-examined by Mr.

Ferguuon.

You searched Allen ? — ^Yes. '

Did you find any papers upon him ?— No;
I found some money.

How much P— About fifteen guineas : I re-
turned it to him again.

At Canterbury, where did the prisoners lie ?
■^-AU in the same room, upon a mattrass in
the parlour.

All in the same room ? — ^Yes.

And was the luggage there ?— Yes, in the
same room.

Was there any person in the room during
the night? — ^Yes, there was a soldier relieved
every two hours.

And were you there during the whole
night ? — Yes.

And never left the room ?— I did at inter-
vals in the beginning of the eventne.

Were you and Revett ever out of the room
at the same time ?-«-! do not think we were.

Edward Fugion cross-examined by Mr*

Scott.

After you had taken the gentlemen from
the King's-head at Margate to the hotel, do
you remember Leary going out into the gar-
den ?•>— Yes, I do.

Relate what passed in the garden between
you and him ? — It is impossible to recollect.

Mr. Justice BuUer, — It is improper for two
counsel for the same prisoner to examine a
witness.

Mr. Do/iai^-When you went into the
garden with him, did you make use of any
threatP^No.

Did not you threaten to knock him down if
he did not tell all he knew?— No; we had
some altercation about going to the vault, he
wanted to bo with me» 1 said he was an im-
pudent little fellow, that was all.

Mr. WUliam Twopeny sworn. — Examined by

Mr. Adam,

You are an attorney at Rochester? — I am.

You were at Margate upon the S8th of Fe-
bruarv?— I was.

Did you see the prisoners there ?— I did.

What did you 00 when you first went' to
Mai|^te ? you went to the King's-head ?— I
did.

What did you do at the King's-head ?— I did
not go to the KingVhead till ai\er they were
in custody.

Did you see them in custody in the parlour
at the King's-head ?— I did.

Do you remember a great coat being
brought down ?— I do.

Did any conversation pa8S?-^Th^ were se-

A.D. 1798. (1278

verally asked which of them it belonged to,
they all denied its belonging to either of
them.

Did they say any thing about the baggage
which was in the parlour ? — ^They deniedthat
also.

Did you see Mrs. Crickett, the mistress of
the house, there P — Yes.

In the presence of the prisoners ? — ^Yes, I
desired they might be brought

What did she say with respect to the bag-
gage of the prisoners? — She said the bageage
came with them, I wanted her to discrimi-
nate which baggage belonged to each, she
could not.

This was in the presence of the prisoners ?
— ^Yes.

Was the great coat particularly asked
about ? — It was, she said that likewise came
with them.

Were you present when any thing was
taken out of the pocket ? — I think they were
in the act of taking them out at the moment.

Where did you go to from the King's head ?
—To Benson's hotel.

When you were at Benson's hotel, did Mr.
Revett take the handkerchief out of his
pocket? — He did, from whence he had put it.

What did you find iu that handkerchief ?—i
A pocket book.

Did you open that pocket-book ?— I did.

Look at that pocket book, is that the pocket
book P — It is.

Look at that i)aper, did vou find that paper
in the pocket book ?— I did.'

Did you read it at the time ?— *I did several
times, I read it first to myself, in order to
know what the contents were, and upon dia-
covering what the contents were, I then refui
it to them

In what manner did you find it in the
pocket book P— There was some writing paper
m the pocket book, and this was in the
writing paper, the top of the writing paper
was pressed down like a sheet of paper folded
together, and the upper' part was rather bent
over, so as to contain this paper within : so
that if I had taken that paper out by itself,
this would not have appeared.

Was It blank paper ?-^It was, at least I did
not see any wriUng upon it; thb was in one
of the folds of it, not direeUy in the middle,
this part was bent over it, so that it was con-
finea.

You are quite sure this is the same paper ?
—Yes, I am.

Dki you receive this paper from Revett ?
[showing him a paper with the address of
Hayman of Deal] P— Yes: he took it out of
the purse, and I took it mm him, I took it
out for the purpose of identifying the men,
fbr I could not nnd any body at Margate that
knew the men.

Did you give back to Revett that paper
which you saw him take out of the purse r-^
Yes, the same paper.

Did you hear any question put to the pri-

1879] 38 GEORGE III. Trial of O'di^y, O^ Conn^ and others [FSSO

•onen as to their oaroes ?*-The prisooers were
f sked as to their names ; they refused to tell
their names; I desired they would not puzzle
them any more about asking them their

names.
Were any more questions asked them 7—

No.

Did you accompany them to Iimdon ?—
Yes, I never partea from them after.

Did you see the paper (the addreu) pro-
duced at Bow-street ? — Yes,and saw it marked.

Was that the same paper you read at Mar-

fite ? — ^Yes, it had neTer been away from us,
would not open any thing there.
Is there any magistrate residing at Mar*
gate?— There is none, I enquired particularly
if there was.

Mr. William T^aoopeny cross-examined by Mr,

Fhtmer.

X understand you to have said that you did
pot go with these Bow-street officers at first,
ypu came after these people were arrested ?—
No : it was in consequence of an arrangement
made, that I did not go with them.

But the &ct was you did not go?— No, not
inside, I was outside.

WfaAt room did they first go into, when
ihey came into the King's- head ?— A parlour
below stairs.

At that time Itad they got the great coat
below stairs ?— Yes, I never went any farther
into the house.

In whose possession was it when you first
saw it? — Revett's.

Below stairs f— Yes.
. Wm >aQy thing taken out of it in the pre*
seiic^ of toe pnsooers P— -I think the thinp
^ere thep taking out in the instant in the
parlour.

. Wheo the pmoners were present?— The
prisoneni were then present; they were then,
1 thiukf either in the act of taking them out,
or had just taken them out

Bui you saw them taken out of the great
fo^fe fioekeU in the ptfrlour below stairs, in the
jpre^enee «f the prisoners?— Yes.

That you are positive of, are you ?*— In the
Wav I state it, I.am certain of it
' You are positive that that pocket book in
particular was produced in the parlour below
stairs, when the prisoners were present?—
Ves, aod the thin^ were put into the hand*
kerehief upon the table.

Do not let me misunderstand you; you are
positive you saw in the parlour, below stairs,
that Uack pocket book, either in the act of
being taken out of the great coat pocket, or
in the act of being produced there, while the
mriioiiefs were present P-*«-Ye8, and put by
Jjtevett into bis ooat pocket
. Whilst the prisoners were present ^«~Yes, it
was in the parlour while I was present, I was
no where else, and could ndt see it any where
else.

You are quite clear about that ?— I cannot
^OfceiYjB that I an mistakea about it

Did you go with these two persons, Revctr
and Fugion, into any other room? — Not in
that house.

Did you go into, a room with them, when
nobody else was present, at any other house?
— At Benson's hotel.

The things were not taken out of the coat
at Benson's hotel, were they f — ^No.

You are positive nothing was taken out of
the great coat pocket at Benson's hotel f^-l
cannot say that nothing was, but that was
not, for it was carried by Revett in his coaf
pocket from the King*s-head to Benson's
hotel

And you are positive they were taken out
before you three got into that room at the
hotel ? — Yes, because they were tied up in a
handkerchief, at the King's-head.

Mr. William Thfopeny re-examined by
Mr. Adam.

The pocket-book was taken out of the
great coat pocket at the King's-head, and tied
up in a handkerchief ?-* Yes.

Was the pocket-book opened at the RingV
head ?-^Not to my knowledge, and I do not
think it likely that it should.

What was yonr reason for not going into
the house ? — I had learned*

Mr. Flumar. — We do not want your rea-
sons.

Mr. Adam. — You did not go into the house?
—I did not

[The paper read.]

'* The Secret Committee of Ei^land to the
Executive Directory of France.

'< Health and Fraternity !

. '* Citisen Directors; — ^We are called loge^
ther, on the wing of the moment, to comiiiii>-
aioate to you our sentiments ; the citksen wtko
BOW presents them to. you, and' who was tha
bearer of them before, having btit a fisw hours
to remain in town, expect not a labored ad-
dress from us, but plainness is the gfeat cha-^
racteristic of republicans.

** Affiurs are now drawing to a great and
awful crisis; tvranny, shaken to its basis,
seems about to be buried in its own niina.
With the tyranny of Ensland that of all Eu-
rope must fall. Haste then, great nation !
pour forth thy gigantic force! Let the base
despot feel thine avengiitt stroke, and let one
oppressed nation carol forth the praises of
France at the altar of liberiy.

^ We saw with rapture your proehmiations.
they met our warmest wishes, andf removea
doubts firom the minds of millions. Go on !
Englbhmen will be ready to second your ef-
forts..

''The system of borrowing, vrhich bal
hither^a enabled bur tynufts to distorb the
peace of a whole world, b at an end; tb^
nave ttied*to raiae t^ kind of forced UuA^ii
hat failed ! Every tax diminishes that revenae
it waa inteaded to ifUgaent, aodthavoUmtey

ini]

Jwr High Treaton.

A. D. 1796.

fija

coDtrilmtiaiM produce almost nothiDg. The
ansioency fmy their taxes under that mask ;
th(^ paor workttMD in lar^ manufactories
hatre been forced to contribute under the
threat of being turned eut of employe even
the army have been called upon to give a
portion m their pay to carry on the war— by
far the greatest part have peremptorily re^
fiiSed td contribute to so base a purpose, and
the fiew that have complied have in general
been eajoled, or relUctantlv compelled to it

^ Englishmen are no longer blind to their
idott sacred ckums; no longer are they the
dupes of an imaginary constitution; every
day they see themselves bereft of some part
of the poor fragment of democracy they have
hitherto enjoyra, and they find, that, in order
lo possess a constitution, they must make one.

** Parliamentary declaimers have been the
bane of our fteecfom. National plunder was
the object of every faction, and it was the
interest of each to kee|^ the neople in the
4ack; but the delusion is past! the govern-
ment has pulled off its disguise, and the very
■len who^ Under the semblance of moderate
r^ofmt only wished \o climb into power, are
now glad to fall into the ranks of the people.
Yea, they have fallen into the ranks, and
there they must for ever remain, for EngUab-
Biea can nefer place confidence in them*

*' Already have the English firatemiied with
the Irish and Sootoh, and a delegate (nm each
now sits with us. The saered £me of liberty
is rekindled, the holy obligation of brother-
hood is received with enthusiasm; even in
the fleets and the armies it makes some pro-
gress— disaffection prevails in both, and
vmted Britain bums to break her chains.

^ Fortunately we have no leader; avarice
and cowardice have pervaded the rich, but
we are not therefore the less united. Some
few of the opulent have indeed, by speeches,
professed themselves the friends or demo-
cracy, but they have not aeted, they have
considered themselves as distinct from the
people, and the people will, in its turn, consi-
der their claims to its favour as unjust and
frivolous. They wish, perhaps, to place us
in the fipont of tba battle, that, unsupported
by the wealth they ciyoy, we any perisn when
they may hope to nse upon our ruin. But
let tbeoa ho tokt, though we may fall through
their cr iaiiinal neglect, they can never hone to
rule, and .that Bi^liahraen^ once free, wtil not
jubmit to a few poiiHical iropostora.

** United as we are, we now only wait with
impatianca to saa the hero of Itai^^and the
brMPo veteranaof the meat nation. Myriads
will hail their amvaTwilh tbouta of ioy;
tbej|.witt^8oan fiush the glorkwia csmpnj|n !
Tyranny will vanish from the face of the
apith» andii enawnedwith kueel^ the invtnci-
y«ainyar FasM^win aalurn 10 its'imlife
mmn^%ut liMg.la^ fsettream^'tpmiae of a

i*^

* 810 in originaL

giatefiil world, whose freedom they have pur-
chased with their blood.
" 6th Pluviose, A. R, P. G. 6." « L. S."

ilna Crkkeit sworn.— Eiamined by Mr. '
Attorney General

Where do you live? — At Margate.

Do you remember any persons coming to
your house on Tuesday the S7th of FehriMitr
last?— Yes.

What number of persons came to your
house any time in that afternoon P«i*At first
three.

Did the three persons who came to your
house appear to be all gentlemen, or what ?«r
I rooked upon them lo be two servants and
one genjUeman.

That was your judgment upon their q^peai« .
ance ? — ^It was.

Did any baggage come with them P— Yesi

How did that baggage comeP— It was
brought in a cart.

Do you recollect who the carter was that
brought it?— One Thomsett

Do you know where they came firom ? — ^No.

Did any other persona come after wants
that evening to your house ?— Yes, about a
quarter of an hour aftierwaids.

How many persons came then ?— Two(. i

Were they, from their appearance, gentle-
men or servants, or how ? — As gentlemen.

Are any of the prisoners at ttie bar any of
those persons?'^Yes. the three in froal^ Mr.
(yConnor, Binns, and CyCo^gf^, and the other
two are behind.

Was thb baffiase takica oul^ of the eaft in
which it came7^-It was.

Where waa It putP— In a parhmr in the
front of the street.

Do you remember the gentleman .whocamto
in first sending for any person?— 'Yos the
person next me (O'Coigly) desired a haia-
dresser to be sent fi>r.

Did any body stay in the room in whidi
the baggage was put? — ^Yes, the two eervanta
atayed m the room with the baggage below
stairs. ' '.

When the othei two gsntlemen eamo that
afternoon, did they make any inqniiy for any
body at your house ?•— Yes.

00 you reooUect which of theas made the
mquiry, and what was the mieslion he asked?
—One of .them asked for Mr. Jones; I car-
ried the message to Mr. 0*Goig^, and he an-
swered to that name» and that be wookl wait
upon them as soon as he was dressed.

Did he ga unaiuiato Milupon theaa?—

He did.

Did he make any re^pnaty or capreai any
deaiietoyou, about the senranta or the bag-
gage, as he wy^ftoing up.stairs^— He desintf
£ia servanto to tdiecare.of hia bugngab

Did the three mtlemeK spend the wMoiat
together in your bouse ?— Yes, they didb

Dn^yott recollect nbmAwhtfl tina tto wenl
to bnAf^About ta«#?€lodkt

4«

H8S] 5S GEORGE HI. Triai qf VCoigly, 0* Connor mid oihm [H84

Was any thing laid to you about the bftg-

Did Ihey appear as if they were fatigued,
as if they had been taking any considerable
exercise ?— I did not Ukeany particular notice
irhen thev first came in.

They slept at your house that ni^ht ?— Yea.

Had you any other guests that night ? — No
other strangers in the House.

Did any other strangers come in as guests
before these persons were apprehended the
next morning P— Nobody else but the town's
people.

Did any body else that had baggage come
in, besides these three gentlemen and their
two servants, till they were apprehended ? —
None else.

Describe the rooms in which they slept ? —
They were all on the same floor witn the
dining-room.

Where did the servants sleep ? — Up another
pair of stairs, in one room.

Who slept in the room on the left hand of
the dining-room ? — I do not know.

Had the two gentlemen, who came last in
the afternoon, any baggage with themP^No.

Just look at that ^eat coat, does it belong
to any of your family, or any body else that
• jou know any thing of? — It is not my pro-
perty, nor the property of any body that I
know.

Jane Dexter sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Solicitor General,

You are sister to Mrs. Crickett?— Yes.

You live with her P— Yes.

Do you remember any gentlemen coming
into your house on Tuesday the 87th of Fe-
bruary P — Yes.

Were you there when they came in ?— No.

Did you find them there upon your coming
into the house ? — ^Yes.

When was that?— About three or four
•*clock in the afternoon.

What persons did you find when you came
to the house in the afternoon?— I found three
gentlemen up stairs, and two below.

Were the prisoners any of the persons that
you found there P— Yes.

Which were the three gentlemen P-^The
ftvtt three that stand in the front row (Mr.
O'Conner, Binns, and CPCoigly).

Where did you find them N-Up stiurs in
the dining-room.

Where were the two others ?— In the front
parlour with the baggase.

Did you wait upon the three gentlemen P
—I did.

' At what time did they go to bed?-<^I believe
it was at about ten o'clock.

Did they appear to be fatigued'F-^Yesw

Do you know in what rooms they slept N^
Yes, in No. 6, No. 7, and No. ie.

How »re tMse rooms situate with lespeot
to the dining-room P**-The dining*room was
No. tf .

- Which waa the room Mr. O'Connor slept
in?-^I cannot teU which room he slept
in ; Mr. aCmely slept in No. 6. but.where
the other two slept I cannot telL

gace ? — No.

Had you any other guests in the hcase that
niebt ? — None.

Was any thine said by the servants about
the baggage ?-^I did not hear any thing.

What time did they get up in the morning?
— ^I cannot recollect.

Did you prepare breakfiut for themf-*
Yes.

At what time P — ^At about nine, as netr as
I can guess.

In what room did you prepare the Ivreak*
fast ?— No. 9, the dinine-room.

Whom did you see men ^ou went in with
the breakfast?— None but this last gentleman
((yCoigly).

How long was that before they were a^
rested P— Just before,

Had you any conversation with that mi*
tleman P— He said he should like to twe a
house, for about a month, for lodgings, that
was ail ? at the same time tliey came in and
took him.

Where did he wish to take a Iodine?— In
any {>art of the town of Margate^ he cud not
mention where.

You did not see any luegage that belonged
to any other persons P — ^No.

You had no other guests in the houses-
No, nobody.

Do you remember seeing a great-coat with,
a black collar ? — ^No, I dp not.

Did that belong to any of the fkmily^— No.

Did you see it when the officer came in ? —
I did not.

Willimn Kerlfy sworn.— Exaniined by Mr.

Gamfw»

I believe you are a stable-keeper at Mar-
gate P— I am.

Do you know the witness, Ann Crickett ?
—Yes.

Did you go^ m consequence of any applica-
tion that was made to you, upon 1 uesday, the
«7th of February, to the King's^head at Mar-
gate P— Yes.

Did you see there any person- whom yoo
now see in Court? — Yes, I saw that genttemaa
(Leary), and that other man (AUen), at the
Ktng's-head.

In what part of the house did yoti seetheo,
and was there any thiug in the roomi— Yes,
thitre was some luggage m the room.

Did it resemble this lying on the taUb?—
Yes.

What passed between you and tfattva two
persons when yuu went there?— I agr^ to
take the luggage to Deal in a cart *
■ Which ofthe two persons spoke to yoQ>—
Leary.

Did he speak to you in the* nrasQMe of
-Allen?— Yes, I said I would tale tbein to
Deal in my cart next moiiiBig. ^as^tad'<kwn
shillings to go to Deal, hem »dd he umild

go up atairs and speak to'lui mailer^ and if
e approved of it tiMgr womU jMri IbaiWf «l
scvfti o'clock.

» .

ll»3

fsf High T^eoi&ru

Did h« kavf you for tl)at purpose, and
alteswards return to you?— Yes, when he
came back he said hismasler had no objection
to the pdce, be would give the price, but
could not get away by seven in the morning ;
he agreed to go at twelve o'clock, he said he
coulq not get his business done to go before
twelve.

Did you agree to ^ at that time?—- I did.

Was any fiing said upon the subject of any
persons accompanying the cart ?— Yes ; Leary
and Allen were to walk alone side of the cart,
and they said they would taXe a bit of break-
fast on ihp road.

You went away and saw no more of them
till afler they were apprehended, I believe? —
Yes; I saw Allen next morning as I rode up
the High-street, he desired me npt to fail
being there at twelve o'clock.

At what time wasit you saw him in high-
street?--! saw him at the King's-head door;
he desired me not to fail being there at
twelve, and they would be ready. -

BeCore twelve arrived they were in custody ?
—Yes.

Are you quite certain these are the two per-
sons wUh whom you bad this conversation ?— •
Yes.

WiUiam Kerby cross-examined by Mr.

DaUoi.

Leaiy said he would go up and ask his
master I— Yes..

Heihen went up and came down again, and
aaid he would be ready to go at twelve ? —
Yes. ,

Next day you were to be, at twelve o'clock,
in wliat street? — ^In the High-street.

You were tu take the baggage away from-
tbence.at twelve o'clock at noon ? — Yes.

Mri AHom^ General.-— 1 am »>ing to pro-
duce Numbers 5, 6, and 7, which purport to
be papers of ordixiation of Mr. CCoigly as a
priest. •

[They were read J

^ Universis ,et singulis quorum intersit,
Infrascriptus attestor, Fidemque facio,barum
ktorem Magistrum Jacobum O'Coigly hujus
Parochie Alumnum, Juvenem esse optimis
Moribus imbutum. piis Catholicisque Paren-
tibus et Thoro ledtimo natum, riteque bapti-
xatum a R. D. Eueenio Laverty (Suscipien-
tibus eum Jaoobo Marlay et Joanna O'Don-
nelly) uno ex Predecessoribus meis, die octava
Mensis Augusti et Ann! Milessimi septingen-
tissimi.8Qxages8imiprimi, necnon ah Illustris-
simo ae Reverendissimo, D. D. Tbomi Froy
Episcopo Ossoriensi confirmatum ; in quorum
Tidem hisce subscripsi, hac Die Decembris
18, 1791. ** DvoLEVS Deolin.

^'Paeochus d£ Killmobe.^

^ Richardus Miseratione divinft et S. Sedis
Apostolics (jrratil £pas Oropensis nee non
PrimatiaUs et Metrdpolitane Eccleue Anna-
«bane Coadjutor, et Administrator,

. A. D. 1798. (ISSS

** Universis et sfaigulis prtesentes nostras
visuris, lecturis pariter et audituris, notum
facimuset attestamur,Nos Dungannonie Die-
bus 31 Decembris, 1 et9 Januarii Annorum
1784, et 1786, nempe Festis S. Silvestri P. A.
Confessoris, Circumcisionis Domini nostri
Jesu Christi, et Dominica immediate inse-
guenti in Ecclesiti parochiali S. Anns, Missas
in PpDlificalibus celebrantes, dilectum Nobia
in Cbristo Filium Jacobum O'Coigly, hujus
Archi DioBcesis Armachans Alumnum, justa
et secundum S. R. £. Ritum Morem et
Consuetudinero, in Vim Privilegiorum Apos-
toiicorum ad primam Tonsuram et quatuor
minores Ordines necnon ad tres sacros, nempe
Subdiaconatus, Diaconatus, et Presbyteratus,
prsviis Exercitiis Spirilualibus rite ac recto
servatis sen^andis, in Domino promovis^e, el
ordinasse — In quorum omnium et sinzulorum
Fidem has priesentes Litcras a Nobis et a
Secretario nostro subscriptaSySigiUoquenost^o
parvo munitas 6^ri jussimus.

(L. S.) ** Richardus Epus. Oropensis
Coadjutor et AduSr, Armacbanus.
" MATTaEus White, Seen.'*

Datum Pantana, Die SO, MartU 1785.

** Richardus Miseratione divin&, et S. Sedii
ApostolicsB Grati& £pus Oropensis, necnon
Prtmatialis et Metropolitans Ecclesise Arma-
chans Coadjutor et Administrator.

*' Universis et Singulis Prssentcs nostras
visuris, lecturis pariter, et audituris, notum
facimus ct attcstarour Reverendum Dominum
Jacobum Coigly Dioecesis Arroacbanse, Pres-
byterum Morum Probitate, Vitcque Integri-
tate esse commendabilem, nulloque excom-
raunicationis, susuensionis interdicti vel Trre-
gularitatis Vinculo innodatum. Quaproptet
eum Studionim, et Pietatis Causft in Catho-
licas Regiones profisciscentein, Episcopis Ca-
tholicis, eorumque Vicariis generalibus vehe-
menter in Domino commendamus, quatenus
ilium benigne suscipiant, et ad Misss Sacrifi-
cium celebrandum admittant Insuper pra-^
dictum R. Dominum Jacobum O'Coigly mag-
nopere comroendatum volumus Collegiorum
nostrorum Moderatoribus, prsesertim vero re-
verendo Admodum Domino Charolo O'Neil
Collegii Longobardorum Parisiensis Prssidi
Spectatissimo, ut ilium in Seminarium stiuni
excipiat, Ut sub ipsiusvigili Curii sacris Disci-
plinis sedulam Operam navans, idoneus tan-
dem confecto Studiorum Curnculo, hujus
Dominica Vinelk Operarius evadat. In
quorum omnium et sin^lorum Fidem has
praesentes literasa Nobis, et a Secretario
nostro subscrfptas, Sigilio^ue nostro parvo
munitas fieri jussimus.

wRicHARpus Epas. Oropeksis
Coadjutor et AduSr. Armacbasus.
" Mattbeus White, Scci«." .
Datum FotUaMf Die 90, MartU 1785.

Mr. Frederick Dutton sworn.— Examined
by Mr. Garrow,

Are you acquainted with Mr. O'Coigly the

1287] 88 GEORGE OI. Trial ofVCm^y, 9Cmn$f and Mm (IfBB

priBoiMir «t the bar ?— I know priest CyCoiely
Teiy well; I knew him at Dundt^yio the
north of Ireland.

Are you acquainted with hk hand^writing ?
—- I have seen him write a number of times.

So as to have acquired a knowledge of his
manner of writing ? — Yes.

Look at that paper and say whether, from
your knowledge or bis manner of writing,
Tou belive that to be his hand-writing P — I oo
believe it to be his writing.

Do you include in that uie signature as well
a»<tbe whole body of the paper? — I believe it
to be all the same hand' writing, and Mr.
(VCoigly's band-witing.

Mr. Gamw.— This is one of the papers
which was found in Mr. OXIoigly's pocket-
book.

[It was read.]

^ Manchester, Feb. U, 1798.
'^ Sir ;-»Notwith8tanding the severe prohi-
bition enforced by the n'cnch against our
iQcrchandize, I am resolved to carry on the
trade at all events. — Sence I tend a confiden"
tial friend to arrange the necessary prelimina'
riet with you, and take proper measures to elude
the for u of that law^if you judge it neceuary
thai he should remain on your side the water
to assist in receiving the goods — be it so, — ^You
will procure him tne passports or protections
necessary in your country. Let me know as
soon as possible whether we may venture to
send gooas into the French territories by land
-—I think it hiehly probable — if so — we shall
have a great snare of the trade to ourselves.
^ Youi's sincerely,

** William Pabxikson."

Addressed — '< Mynheer George Frederick

Vander Hoop^ Speigel-straet, Rotterdam."

Look at this letter, signed Edward Wallace?
—I believe that al^o to be Mr. O'Coigly's
hand-writing.

Mr. Garrow. — ^We shall read this presently
when we have proved it to have been found
in the prisoner O'Coigly's pocket book.

Mr. ufl^^ornc^Genrro/.-— Look at that pap«r
U'^pAM]— Do you find there the band^writ^
fug of Mr. O'Coigly ?^Yes.

Mr. Fndtriek Button cross-examined by Mr.

Plumer,

You are Mr. Frederick Duttoni I think ?•-
Ves.

Wbai are you?-^A quarter*mai^r in th«
foyal Irish 4rtillery,

What were you before you were that?— I
had a commission in the revenue which I
hold yet.

How long is it since you were servant to a
gentleman? — I have not been a servant for
some time, now.

Whose footman were you lastP — I do
not conceive that I was any person's foot-
man.

Have you any doubt sboui it?— I have a
doubt M to being a footman.

Waa it . butler ?-^I sever
a footman.

In what caiMc^y ham yeu 4w0Dl--t lM*a
been engageo as ^wn man and buUar, biil
never as a footman.

How many eentlemen's own servant have
yeu been who had no Mlier servaQt but y«a f
— There were other servants in the house siiek
as a coachman.

You were a livery servant F— You may term
it that way if yoo please, although I wore ray
own clothes.

Do you mean to swear you never wore a
livery ?— No, I will not swear that ; but I was
not engaged as a livery servant.

When I put the question to you, wbelber
you were a Uveiy servant, you said yeu may
put it so if you please, but I wore my own
clothes ? — I was engaged by Mr. Carpenter of
Armagh, as his o%n man i|nd butler ; he
begged I would wear the livery till another
servant was got^when that s^apt was got I
did not wear the livery,

Then it now comes out that you did wear a
livery, and were in tbe capacity of a servant f
— ^Yes.

How many people did ymi serve f— I fived
with captain Bartom of the 63d regiment four
years at first; J a(Urwarda went tQ49ctor
Levingston, and from that to Mr. Lee, and
from that to Mr. Carlisle, and from that to
Mr. Carpenter; I think thalistheesiteiitof
my servitude; I attended Mr. Coleman lee^l
forgot him.

• That is five persons yeu Imvo been ssi isat
to. Upon what occasion were you dismissed
the service of Mr. CarlMe?-^! dare Say yoa
will think it sufficient when I tell you» on my
oath, that Mr. Carlisle over*paicl m» my
wages, and I have never met him since willi.
out his speaking to me on the mesi friendly
terms.

Mr. Justiee Bn/Zer.— Answer the -^nsetion^
on what occasion did you leave hmi-f—ln
consequence qf i^ ixilamoua woman having
told a lie about me, which I beKeve Mr. Car-
lisle at this moment believes lo be en.

Mr. J^/iimer..T^What was that He?u>lliipga
she laid to my ehai|^that I wns not gaiSf
of.

What things ^A number ef things.

Theft among the vssi K— Ves.

And upon that you were dismissed >-*Up^
her information I was dismissed | and I am
sure that Mr. Carlisle at this day, ftom the
countenance he always gives me^ is w^ «»-
vinced t was not miiuiy^

Pray how ollen have ym been a vritness ia
a cmtt of justieer— Ab> I to anchrfs lliis
iamef

Bkher inelude] or tsolude it ?— I wae tiiisa
before.

Upon what occasions?— I wasbjrought as a
witness against one Kaaa^ in Dowa^Bstriek, a
man who was esseufed} and 1 vraft^braqiM
against eae Lowi^i ai t|ie hd l^jmwmmtt
assise*

ISB92

Jbr High Treaum.

A. D. 179A.

[IflM

Were you a semmt when you were brought
^s a witnese first ?— >I was not.

What were you ?— I was then keei)iog a
puUie«hou86 and grocery ; during the time I
was a servant, I kept a public house and gro*
eery too.

' While you were a gentleman's servant? —
Tes ; my wife carried on the business.

Do you mean to swear that you kept a
pablic-bouse during all the time you were a
servant to these five different gentlemen ? —
From the time that I lived with Mr. Coleman
till I lefl Mr. Carpenter, I kept a grocery and
public house: I had a grocery licence the
whole time; but I did not the whole time
I MvedwithMr. Coleman keep a public-house.

Did you keep a public house or not? —
Yes.

Without a licence ?— No ; I had a grocery
licence firom the time I lived with Mr. Cole-
man, till I left Mr. Carpenter : I had the
public licence part of ibo time, but not the
whole time. -

From the time you terved Mr. Coleman,
yohf bad this licence for a publk-housel —
Yea.

But before that, ypu were nothing but a
fltrvantP — Befbre I went to Mr. CSleman,
Aothine else.

I bdfieve you were discharged from Mr.
Coleman's upon a similar charge?— I was
not.

Upon what occasion were you discharged
by him ? — In consequence of his eohabitmg
with another man's wife, and my diseoverine
it; and he took a prayer book, and wanted
me to take an oath liiat I would not discover
h ; and he ollered me twenty guineas ; and
b»5ause I would not take that oath he dia-
charged me.

And you mean tp swear upon your oath,
you were not discharged because some money
wa9 missing out of a drawer? — By virtue of
my oath, and as-I shall answer it to God, I
n^ver heard it from that day to this.

Do you recollect a person of the name of
Lavf r ? — ^Very • well.

Do vou remember threateniog that you
WFould be revenged on aeeount of this business
Of Mr. Coleman's F— I do not recoUect any
auch thing.

. Will you swear you never said you would
bcf revenged' ?-»I might say that I would make
htm make a fair settlement, when he took my
books and burned them.

You wiH swe^ you ney^ said tb^ij^ ?«*^I. do
not recollect ever navii^g said that; I know
At different times I consulted with Mr. Laver,
in what manner l should proceed so as to
bring Mr. Coleman fee a settlement. When
I quarrelled with ^m, he burned the books.

You once lived at I^iUdalk, did n«^ you f—
Yes.

You do not livo there nowN-l do not
I brieve you lo^^ somq diarg^ b^ron
fhaglatrate tb^ra, agonal Mr. Cemaiin, jpour
master ?— I' did to an attorney, not to a ma-
|;istrate.

aftar thai, you ka the lOaea; didoot
you ?— Yes.

And went to a distance firom thence: you
have never applied to be rewarded for yovr
evidence any where when you were in Ire«
land f — I t)elteve not.

You believe not, you must know whether
yuu have or not. Did you ever ask far a
place of Mr. Cook the secretary in Ireland ?
— I believe I never have asked Mr. Cook for
any thing.

You never applied to him upon any su^
ject of giving you any thing?— I believe not.

You must know whether it is so or not?
^-I will swear to the best of my belief.

* A man can have hardly forgot the case of
an application to the secretary of stale. You,
who were once a common footman, and are
now a quarter-master, as you represent, can
tell whether you have ever asked a place of
the secretary of state ?^ I have never asked
the seeretary of stale for any thing, nor go-
vernment for any thine ;' and I do not eoa-
sider them as Indeblra to me; for I have
done no more than my duty; hot I do hope
government will provide for my family, tnd
protect me.

Have you never applied for a quartet-maa-
tor's warrant f— I never did, upon my oath.

You swear to hand-writings ; let me sea if
you know your own hand-writing.-lLook at
the signature to that letter ? — I believe it is
my band-writine ; I really do not know the
contents of it I know that I never appHed
to Mr. Cook eitherby letter or otherwise.

The question I asked was, whether ye«
ever applied to any person for a (|uarter-mos-
tePs place ? — I never did; I l>elieve tiiat lo^
tor was to lord Carhampton. There was an
anonymous letter sent to me at N«wry,lo
bring me up in the dead of the night; a man
was murdered that night; this letter was
signed Henry £iistaeo, ordering my attend-
ance at the castle at Dublin. 1 never knew
lord Carhampton; but upon inquiring wh»>
ther I couw see his lordshi|>, I went to him,
and said, in consequence of your lordship'slet-
ter, I am come here, in obedience to your lord*
ship's commands. He said, I do net know
you : who are you. I said, I came In conse-
quence of a letter I received last night; I
gave lord Carhampton the letter; he brought
me into his own office ; captain Eustace was
alone with him. On looking over il^ they
foimdiliobe a oounisrfMt; captain Suslaoa
said, it is like ariy hand ; Iwt I swear I nevev
wvotoit You have had a most mifaailous
escape, sadd lord Carhampton.

Mr^Ottmsy^—Thtscertainly is not evidence.

llr» P(aMMtv-i*Ha is telling a long story
about what passed between bin and IwdCap-
hampton.

Mr. JttsHco Zoawsnor.— You asked him if
Aatwas his kmid-wfitin^r haiseiflabiiig
^leletlor.

Mr. Pimnu .—Be has posMvel^^dented that
he ever applied to lord Carhamploii for a quar*
ter master's warrant.

Ifienm.*— I tak^ I did not apply to Mr.
Cook.

Mr. Justice Btti^er.-'Ue has just said, that
he did apply to lord Carbampton.

Mr. Gttrficry.—>Mr. Plumer asked him, if he
ever applied to Mr. Cook *• be said, No.— Then
Mr. Plumer asked him generally, if be applied
to any body , be said, No.

Mr. Justice BulUr, — ^I have taken it so.

Mr. Phmer. — My question to him was,
whether be had applied or not for a quarter-
4BDaster't warrant

WUneu, — I did not apply for it

You never did, to any body? — I did not

Not to lord Carbampton, nor any body else?
^^Ufi first promised it to me bewre I wrote
any thing to him about it ; . then I ^ijroXc if
I might 00 down to my family in the North.

Then I understand now, that after he had
womisedy you did apply to him, to remind
oimofbis promise, and to desire he would
•remember it?— That might have been the

Am I to understand that that was the fact,
«r not ? — As &r as I jrecoUect, I wrote to him
begging he would give me an answer, whether
I must stay in town, or go to my family ;
Ifaat it was more than I could afford, to be
myself in one place, and my family in ano-
llier.

Was that before, or after you had been eit-
amined as a witness ?— After my first exami-
nation as a witness, I believe.

Were you in the capacity of a servant when
you were examined as a witness ?— No, I was

BOt.

How long had you ceased to be 80 ?-— A few
oontlis.

Both the times when you were a witness,
you had ceased a few months at each time ? —

Yea.

You have sworn you saw Mr. O'Coigly
write. Upon what occasion did you ever see
him write ? — On various occasions : I have
teen him write letters aqd notes ; I have car*
ried notes to the postH»fiSce for him, and can
relate a singular circumstance to you and the
Court

I do not want your singular circumstance.

Mr« Garrom.-^The witness is entitled to
give tiie answer.

Mr. Plumer. — ^Your lordship sees how he
tacks things on to his answer.

IFiAiesf.— There was a poor, man of the
name of Coleman in the jgaol of Dundalk : he
was under sentence of^ transportation, or
death, I cannot say which ; he w^ taken veiy
iM

. Mr. P/tMwr.— Dont tell us about sentence
of transportation, or death, without producing
the proper evidence of it

Mr. uomov.— -He was in prison ? .

iritii(Bit:<— -Yea;' this man. bad a wife, and
was in*grea| distress : the man's wife used to
come to my little shap for tea and bread, and
what tbe3r wanted: she had no money, and
left her misband's watch in my possession for

1S911 88 GEORGE HI. Trial tfO^Coigln, ff Connor and others [ItM

the goods she wanted. Priest 0*Coig]y, I be-
lieve, through an act of charity to the poor
man, took upon him to have this watch
raffled, to relieve the poor man : he took a
piece of paper, and put his own name, and
af\er that about a dozen more, and desired ma
to call upon these people, and they would
give me a shilling a-piece; he gave me his
shilling, and said he would collect more about
the town.

Mr. F turner. — ^Upon that occasion you saw
him write ?— Yes.

How many times have you ever seen him
write ? Have you seen him write three times ^
— For more than twelve months together I
have seen him write two or three times a weeJ^
regularly : He used to come to Mr. Coleman's
room every day : I do not think, during the
fifken months I lived with Mr. Coleman, ha
was with him upon an averajge less than two
days a week.

Look at that paper, and tell me whether
that too is your hand-writing? — I swear thai
u not my band-writing.

Look at the back of it? — My name is on
the back of it; my name, in my own hand-
writing, or else it is a very complete counter-
feit, it is very like it There is nothing my
hand- writing but my name subscribed on the
back ; the other I know nothing about.

I believe you were examined upon one of
those occasions, as, a witness against one,
Lowry?— I was.

Upon that occasion do you remember your
saying that you had been sworn not to di-
vulge the secret ?-^I did.

And the way you got out of it was by say-
ing the book you swore on was a book ** Read*
in^ made Easy ?"— -All that is true. 1 akj
this, that an oath was proposed, and that it
was to be on a '^ Reading mad6 Easy ;" I did
not coticeive that I was bound by it as an
oath.

You had bought some plate of this man?— >
Yes.

You swore to secresy upon this book;
** Reading made Easy," not to discbse that
you had bought it ?— Yes.

Afterwards you came into a court of jus*
tice, and swore a^hst him?—- 1 took tha
oath at that time with the intention of doing
so ; it was with the intention of apprehending
the robbers that I did it, by the oirections of
Mqor Walton; it was not my own money
that I purchased it with,

Mr. Frederick Duiton re-esatnioed by Mr.

Garroa,

You wero examined in a cotirt of justice
under the usual forms and sanctions^ swag-
ing on the Evangelists?-^! was.
. And upon that occasion you disclosed an
illegal oath which bad been' administered to*
you, upon 'a- book which had* no soieauiHy
nor sanction belonging to it ?— I did.

And which oath was, that you would con*
ceal a felony previously committed f— Yes.

IfDSJ

Jot High Treason.

Was the oath administered to you, or did
you take that book into jrour hand, and swear
yourself P^-^H was administered to me.

In order to be able to disclose a felony pre-
'viou8l}[ committed, upon the subject of the
plate : if I understand you right, you purchased
the plate, and undertook, upon this illegal
oath, not to disclose the transaction ; you were
aAerwards called upon in a court of justice,
under the solemn sanction of a legal oath; to
disclose the transaction ?— I was.

Did you disclose it tnilv P— I did.

Did you attend Mr. Coleman whilst he was
in prison ? — I did, fifteen months.
' Do you know what be was in prison for P

I^r. Plumer, — ^That must be proved in a
proper form.

Mr. Garraw. — How long have you been a
quarter-master ? — I think since last Novem-
ber ; I have my warrant in my pocket.

Mr. Piumer. — ^With iiis lordship's permis-
sioa I wish to ask whether the man was ac-
quitted or convicted about the plate P-

Mr. Garrow, — Mr. Flumer has forgotten
bis own objection of not having the record
here.

Mr. William Lane sworn.-— Examined by Mr.

Garrow,

Are you acquainted with the band-writing
of Mr. 0'Ck>nnor ?— I am.

Have you seen him write P — I have.
' Have you seen him write often enough to
have furroed an acquaintance with his cha-
racter of hand-writing ? — I have.

I/>ok at that paper; do you, from your
knowledge of Mr. O'Connor's hand -writing,
believe that paper to have been written by
himP — I do.

[The paper read.]

*' Dear Jones; thir friend Bell requests yon
will dine with him this day at five o'clock. I
hope to see you. Your'sever,

•' Sunday. O. C."

«

Mr. William Lane cross-examined by Mr.
, Dallai.

I believe you are an attorney, and live at
Cork? — I am an attorney, and do live at
Cork.

At what time was Mr. O'Connor sheriff of
the county of Cork? — He came into the office
in February, 1791.

I believe you were his under-sheriff during
the time he served the office ?-^I was.

• 'Was not Iceland at that time in a state of
considerable disturbance ? — ^At the end of the
year h was.

Was not Mr. O'Connor «t considerable
expense to maintain the tranquillity of the
county f — I believe him to -h Ave been a very
^od bigh-shenff.

Mr. Garrow, — This paper has been proved
to. have been found in O^Coiely's pocKet by
lEKMett Do feu, Mr. Lane^ believe that to
haive beet written bj Ml. (yCoDnorP--It is

A. D. 179a* [ISd4

veiy badly written, but I believe it to be bis
hand-writing.

Mr. Da/Ins.— 'Look at it again, and tell me
whether you will take upon you to swear that
that is Mr. O'Connor's hand. I am sure you
will not do what is wrong ?— I certainly believe
it to be Mr. O'Connor's hand-writing.

[The Letter read.]

" My dear Captain ; — I enclose you a bank*
note for 10/. I am sorry it is not in my
power at present to accommodate you farther,
as I have been disappointed in receiving re*
mittances from Ireland. I mentioned to you
my having some bills of Flannock's, which
are here perfectly useless to me. Shall I see

Sou before you go to the cuuntiy ! Particular
usiness prevents me firom calling on you
this morning. Yoer's,

"A ♦ -

«< Twelve o'ck)ck.

Addressed to '* Lieutenant Johnes,
No. 14, Plough-courty Fetter-lane."

Mr. Attorney GeneraL^l would ask whe-
ther these two letters are Mr. O'Connor^s
hand-writing P

Mr. Lane. — ^They are.

Mr. Attorney General.— I mean to read
them hereafter; the first is a letter to lord
Edward Fitzgerald, the other a letter to Mr.
Roger O'Connor.

Jama Clari$ sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Adam.

Do you know the prisoners at the barf—*
One I have seen before, Binns. *

Do you remember his coming to you at
Canterbury, on the 3Srd of February last? — ^It
was about that time he came to my shop,
about the SSnd or S3rd ; he introduced himselr
to me by the n^me of Williams, he made an
apology for introducing himself to me as a
stranger. In the course of conversation a
person's name came up that I expected waa
the person that recommended him to me, it
Mr. Rickman, in London.

After he had introduced himself to you,
did he ask you any questions respecting the
coast of Kent ?»He said he had business on
the coast of Kent; that he wanted informa-
tion respecting people on the coast engaged
in the smugghne business.

Did you give him any information P^— I told
him that my acouaintance with people of thai
description was out litde, but I apprehended
at any place round the coast he might find
numbers of people engaged in that biisiness;
he asked me the way to Whitstable ; I direct-
ed him the way to Whitstable; he asked me
if r could recommend him to any person at
Whitstable; I said there vras nobody there
that I could ^ke that liberty with ; he asked
kne the names of the public houses in the
place; I enumerated most of theni tl^itt I

* The rest of Ihe signature illegible.

JS9$] S8 GEORGE III. Trial of O'Cwgly, O* Connor and others [1296

moraingp when he first latrodoced himidf to
me.

Did be say any thing about the hoj wheA
he came back to Canterbury ?-^I do aoiknow
that he did in particular; I believe something
passed that I recollected the boy generally
came in in the beginning of the week; that
vessel seldom comes in tiu a Monday. I had
occasion to write to a relation of mine at
Deal, and I put a postscriot to the letter.

Does that postscript relate to Williams ?-«
It certainly related to Williams.

When did you see him after this; did
Williams, or Binns, as you know him boW
to be, desire j^ou to write that postscript? —
Yes ; I told him, having occasion to write to
a friend, I should put a postscript to this
person, that he might, if he pleased^ call
upon him.

Mr. Da//a«.— His beina desired to write a
letter is evidence; but the contents of that
letter is not evidence.

Mr. Adam, — ^No; but that he wrote the
postcript in consequence of a conversation.
When did you seenim after that? — Sunday
evening aflerwards I saw him again in Can-
terbury.

Where did you see him at that timef — At
a public house called the Sun, in Canter-
buiy.

Who was with him then P-*Mr. MaboDC7
came up to me in the evening, and told me—

Mr. Da//a«.— You must not state what
passed with him.

WUnegs. — ^The way I came to see him then,
was through the inviution of Mr. Mahooey
to eo down and see Mr Williams again.

Who was with him at that time ?— lliere
was nobody in the room when I went in;
but I went with Mr. Mahoney and anottier
friend or two from my bouse.^ I had some
conversation with him, and then he admitted
that his name was Binns.

What else did be say ?— He said his raason
for going by another name was» being so
latelv tned at Warwick assizes, he tboi^ght
people might make impertinent inquiries.

Iiow long might you remain with lum
theie P— Probably two hours.

Did you see any more of him P— I never
saw him again till I saw him at the bar.

Did you mean Rickmaa,by CUo?— Tes«

ncoUected; I reeoinmended him to one
bouse in particular, knowing the landloid of
the house, 1^. Kitchingham, the Duke of
Cwnberland.

Did he ask you about any gentleman in
Canterbury whom he was directed to ? — ^Yes;
he asked mc where he was to find Mr.
Mahoney, I went with him there, he intro-
duced himself to him in a similar manner as
be did to me, but I did not hear the whole
that passed between them, I had occasion to
go away ; when I came back again he was
v»ere, I repeated my directions again of the
road to WhitsUble.

What time in the evening was this P — It
was in the morning, I shoula suppose about
eight oViock; it was before my breakfast*
time, } usually breakfast between eight and
nine.

What inn did jou first see him at? — The
first time I saw him at any inn was the event
ipg of the same day.

Did he goto Whitstable?— He did, as I
suppose; I saw him again in Canterbury that
evening at a porter-house, a common public
room for strangers and inhabitants shop-
keepers.

Did he ask you any directions to anv other
place P-^In the course of that evening he told
me he thought he should not make it do at
Whitstable, or should not succeed, or words
to that effect ; I gave him a direction ; af\er
some conversation he said he should go to
Deal, could I recommend him to any person
in particular at Deal ; I did so.

Whom did vou recommend him to there P
*— I recollected a person I knew of the name
of Caropbeli, and I wrote him a note, which
he carried to Mr. Campbell.

Is that the note you wrote ?— i^Yes; this is
my hand*wrHing.

[It was read.]

Canterbury^ Feh. S9, 1798.
** Dear Campbelh—The bearer (Mr. WU.
iiams) is a friend of our friend Clio, and ap-
pears to want some information on business,
of what nature I know not, but suppose in
the smuggling trade ; from the recommenda-
tion I have received he appears to be worthy
af assistance, and having no friends in Deal,
he wished me to write a note by way of intro-
fioction. You will excuse (I hope) the liberty
I take, and judge of him from what you hear
from nimsdf^^I remain, dear Sir, your^
lesfectfuUy, James CLAais.**

Addressed to ^ Mr. Campbell,
Pilot, Deal.'''

If r. Adam. — Did he tell you any thine of
whalbad passed at Whitstable ?-^No;lmt
that it would not answer his purpose,

Pid. ha say anjr thing about the hoy ?-^He
saifd «a the ftornVng he was going to Whit-
stable; he expected some things oown by the
hoy, and soma fttenda; 4bat was.ift the

1

Tkomoi CHo Rkkman sworn. — Exaouned by

Mr. Gorrom.

I believe you live in X4>ndonP*«Yeai

Are you acquaii^led with a person of the

name of CUris, atCanterbivry ^^Yeew
Do you know the prisoner at the bat,

Bmns?— ^o; I do aolmooUact over seeing

him befbm.
Did you ever give him ai^ intraductieB to

Mr. Claris, either by letter of mossigeP— I

saver did.
Your name is CHe ]Uckatianf(rrires»
Andyouase kpowi br tMMSB to CItrof

--Very weU» some fmm>u§^

1807]

J9f High Treason,

Kean Mahoney sworn. — ^Examincd by
Mr. Solicitor General,

You are a fishmonger and fruiterer at Can-
terlniry f — ^I am.

You have formerly been in a different
aituation, I believe ? — Yes.

Do you know Mr. Binns P — I do.

Do you remember his coming with Mr.
Claris at any time ? — I do.

When was that? — I eannot speak posi*
lively as to the day, btit it was somewhere
in the latter end of February, I believe; I
know it was on a Friday.

Did vou know him before he came to you
with daris ? — No ; I never saw him before.

What conversation had you with him ?-^
He told me he was recommended by a friend
of his to call on me ?

Who was that friend ? — ^A Mr. Bailev.

Of what place ? — I do not know where he
wtas then, but he formerly lived at Forcditch,
near Canterbury.

Do you know what was become of Mr.
Bailey at that time? — No.

What did he say when he introduced him*
self to you? — He toid me there were some
friends of his were very much distressed to
get to the other side ; that they wanted to
establish something in the srouegling line,
«nd that he was anxious to get them on the
oth^ side ; that previous to his leaving Lon-
don he was directed to call at Whitstable,
that h^ wished to know if T. knew any persons
there that were used to letting boats*; I told
Inm I did know, and mentioned the name of
one in particular, a man of the name of
Foreman.

Where did Foreman live? — ^In Whitstable.

What is heP-^He belongs to the Oyster
Company of Dredgers.

Did Binns ask about any body at Whit^
stable ? — tfe said he was directed to a person
of some other name, which I do not imme-
diately recollect ; but I should recollect the
name if I heard it— it was of the name of
Appletott.

When he said he wanted to go on the other
side, did he say to what place? — He did not
say he wanted to go ; but he had some friends
in London wanted to go on the other side^
he said either to Flushing or Ostend.

Did you see Mr. Binns again that evenine?
•^I saw him on his return from Whitstable,
that was, I believe, that evening.

What conversation had you with him then ?
— I asked him how he was likely to succeed,
he toid me he feared not at all. I asked him
why ; he said they were so exorbitant in their
demands, that ''-he was afraid he could not
comply with them.

Did you see hiiti aAer that ? — On Sunday
I saw mm, he caUed at a public- house where
I- was, in Canterbury, on horseback.

What was the public-house ?— The Shakes-
pear.

What did he say to you then?— He told

VOL. XXVI.

A. D. 1798. [1298

ma he was very much fatigued, having rode
from Oravesend, and wished to rest himself;
and desired me to recommend him to some
house where he could be more private and
comfortable than he was where he was last.

Did he say where he had been ? — ^That he
had been to London.

Did he tell you what for?— I imderstood
it was to acquaint those gentlemen with his
journey to Whitstable, and the result of it ;
he did not tell me that.

Did he say when he left London ? — Yes ;
he said he leh it in the morning of Sunday, that
he got to Gravesend in one of the Gravesend
boats.

Did he tell you how he got from Gravesend
to Canterbury ? — On horseback.

Did he say any thing more to you about
his reason for comins back?— He said the
gentlemen were not at London that he wanted
to see.

Did he say any thing about those gentle^
men, whether they were coming, or what?—
No.

Did he mention any thing about the Whit*
stable boy? — He said he understood they
were to come by the Whitstable hoy ; but he
could not tell any thing of it, because they
were gone, he said, before he came out of
London.

He said he wanted a quieter house than he
was at before ; what house was he at before F
—The Rose, he told me.

Did you recommend him to any house ?-«
I did.

What was that house ?— The si^ of the
Sun, kept by a man of the name of Cloke.

Did you go with him there? — I did.

When you got there, did he desire you to
inqmre about any letters ? — No, he did not;
he said he wished to know whether there
were any letters for him at the office, and
wished to get a servant boy in the house to
go to inquire for them ; I told him I would
go, as he was so fatigued.

Where did he direct ^you to go? — To the
Post-office, or to the Fountain ; I went to the
Post-office.

What did you inquire for?— Letters to the
name of Williams, addressed to the office, or
to the Fountain.

Did you find any letters there?— The post>-
master delivered me two, addressed to the
name of Williams.

Where?— I do not know exactly, for I did
not take upon me to read them.

Who paid for them ?— I did, and was repaid
by hin^ when I delivered him the letters,
which was immediately ; I know nothing of
their contents.

Look at that letter.— I see it is dir«cted by
the name of Williams.; but I cannot say this
is the letter : I put them both in my pocket
as soon as I received them from the pbst-
inastar, and did not examine them at all ; I
thought it a matter of impertinence to do
such a thing: I t6ok the po8t<«iaster*6 word

40

IS99] S8 GEORGE HI. Trial o/O'Coi^ ff Connor and othen [1300

that the J were directed for him ; I took them
and put them icnmed Lately into my pocket,
and delivered them to Mr. Binns, and be paid
me for them.

Kean Mahoney cross-examined by Mr.

Gurney.

Mr. BInns desired you to enquire for letters
by the name of Williams?— He did.

Did he give you any particular reason for
not going by his own name ? — He did, and it
appeared to me a very sufficient reason : he
first mtroduced himself to me by the name
of Williams; then, aAer having mentioned
his business, and finding I was a native of the
same kingdom he belonged to, he told me he
hoped he need not use any more disguise
with me ; he told roe he would inform me
his name was Binns, and the reason why he
did not continue that name, was, his having
once been tried for an offence against the
laws of the country, and that though be was
acquitted, he understood Canterbury to be so
curious a place, and inquisitive, that he did
not choose to go by his own name.

Did he tell you he understood bis letters
were opened at the Post-office that were
directed to him bv the name of Binns? — I
am not positive of that ; but I believe ther«
was something of that kind passed.

You saw him afterwards, I believe on. the
Monday morning? — ^I did.

Upon that occasion did you go to Claris's
shop, and purchase a map of Kent for him ?
—He came to me in the forenoon about
twelve o'clock, I pressed him to stay dinner
with me, he declined it, and begged I would

fo and purchase a miap of Kent for him, vbich
did.

Look at this map, has it the appearance of
being the map .' — ^This has the appearance of
bein^ such a map as I bought.

Did he borrow any article of clothing of
Tou on that Monday ? — ^Yes, he sud, not
havine any luggage, he vranted a shirt and
neckcloth. I lent nim a shirt and neckcloth ;
I was obliged to call for bis, in order to have
them washed against his return.

How soon did^ he propose returning?— I
understood in a da^r or two.

And you got his linen washed for him
against his return ?— I did.

You did not understand that he vras going
abroad?— No, I never understood so.

William Kitchingham sworn. — Examined by

Mr. Garrow,

I believe you keep the inn, known by the
name of the Duke of Cumberland^ at Whit-
BUble ?-^Yes.

Do you remember, on Friday the SSrd of
February, seeing any person at your house
who is now inCourt ?— Yes, that man (Binns).

He came to your house ?— Yes.

What did he say to you P— He inquired if I
knew a Mr. Mahonty, a fishtnonger, at Can-

terbury; I told him I did not : if he had pro-
nounced it Mahon, I should have known it ;
he then asked me whether I knew Mr. Claris^
a stationer there ? I said yes : he said he was
recommended to my house by Claris. He then
asked me if I knew Foreman or Appleton of
Whitstable ? I asked him which of the Applet
tons, for there were several ? He said the one
that had got a vessel ; I told him that that Ap-
pleton was at Chatham ; he said be was going
to Canterbury; he asked me if I thoueht
he could get a vessel to go on the other side ;
I supposed he meant to Flushing; I told him
I thought not, as the navigation was stopped.

Was there an embargo at that time upon
the ships at Flushing ?— Yes; he told me he
thought it was not.

Did you mention any other place that he
might go to ?— Yes ; I told him he misht g^
over to Guernsey, and he said that would not
do ; he might be as well where he was. I
asked him then if I could not send for some
master of a vessel ; I told him I would weoA
for Foreman, and went out for that purpose.

Did Foreman keep a vessel?— He has part
of some vessels which belong to the oyster
zround. I saw Mr. Foreman near my own
ooor; I told him there was a man at mj
house wan led to go on the other side; I told
him I did not much like htm

Mr. Dallas. — You must not state any thing
you said to Foreman when the prisoner Binns
was not present.

Mr. GorroB).— Did you introduce him to
Binns?— I did.

What passed? — I left him alone with
Binns.

Did Binns stay there and dine ? — ^Yes, he
had some oysters, and went out afterwards,
and he told me he should return in two hours.
I asked him if he had got a satisfactory an-
swer from Mr. Foreman, when Foreman left
him, he said he should know when Appleton
came back, he was gone to his owners; he
went out then ; he returned again, and asked
me whether Appleton was come back ; I told
him no. Appleton afterwards came with
N orris and Foreman ; they went into a room
by themselves ; I was nat present at their
conversation; I heard no discourse till Binns
was gone.

You must not state what they aud after
Binns was gone. Had you any farther dis-
course with Binns ?«—No.

When did Binns quit your house? — He
went away about one o'clock, and left them
there.

Are yot» sure this is the same person? — I
am.

William Kitchingham cross-examined by Mr.

Dallas.

You do not know what passed in the room
between Norris and Appleton.^ — ^No farther
than carrying in liquor, but I did not stay in
the room.

1301]

J9r High TrtM^n*

A. D. 1798.

[1S02

Edmird AppUton »worn.--£iftiniQ«d by Mr.

FUlding,

Do you know the persons of any of the
priflouera?*— YeSythe middle one, Bions.

Did you see him at Whitstable on the 33rd
of February P— Yes.

What time of day was it?— Between
twelve and one o'clock, when I (iral saw him.

At what house did you see him P— At the
Duke of Cumberland.

How came you to see him ?— I went to him
there.

Was any bodv in company with him when
you went mto the room ? — ^No ; Foreman and
I went in together ; it was between twelve
and one.

What was said when you and Foreman
went into the room ? — He addressed himself
to me,9nd asked roe what he should eive me
to tak^ him across the water. I told nim the
times were fMurticular, and there was an em-
bargo in all the ports, and I could not engage
till I had seen my owners.

When you first went into the room, was
there any conversation about you or Foreman,
who you were ?-• -No.

Then upon jrour making this observation,
in answer to his question, what more passed
between you P— He asked me several times
what he should give me ; I told him I could
not engage with him till I saw my owner; I
would go to Heme Bay for that purpose, and
would be back in two hours.

How far is Heme Bay P-^ About five miles;
we parted ; after I got out of the door, he asked
me again how much he should give roe for
taking; him across; I told him I could not
give him an answer till I had seen my owner.

The question was asked you again when
you were going out of the room ; you said it
was answering no purpose talking about it till
you had seen your owner P— Yes.
- Did Foreman say any thins to him while
vou were theve P— Yes ; but I do not recol-
lect what Foreman said.

Do you recollect any question that he asked
of Foreman ? — No, not m particular.

Was any thing more said at the door whrn
you were goiug away than what you have
related?— No.

Did you ler,ve him at the house?— Not at
the house ; I went to Mr. Norris my owner.

When you bad seen Mr. Norris, did you
and Mr. Norris see Btnns again?— Yes.

When was that?— About four in the after-
noon.

Was it at the same house you had seen him
at before P— Yes.

Was Foreman in company with you «t that
time P— Yes.

Then you were all four, Norris, Foreman,
BinnSy and you, in a room together? — Yes.

Now relate what passed at that time. Did
be besin the conversation with you, or you
with him?— The first conversation, I believe,
was between Norris and Binns; he asked
Mr. Noirris first what be should give him to

hire his vessel to carry him across the water
to Flushing, Dunkirk, or Calais?

You had told him before that Norris was
your owner ; did he know that the man you
brought with you was Norris? — I told him so.

Now tell rny lord and the jury particularly
what he said to N orris P—N orris said it was*
hazardous, and a great expense, the vessel
being stopped, and so on.

Did he say any thing to Norris before be
said that ? — He asked him what he should

five him to carry him across the water to
lushing, Dunkirk, Calais, or Havre. Mr.
Norris said he could not think about letting
h is vessel go without he bad securi ly for her. He
asked him the value of the vesse^ and Bin us
called himself Williams at that time; Norris
asked three hundred guineas; Binns asked
did he take him for a child, to ask any sucK
sum as that; and there were some words be-
tween Mr. Norris and Mr. Binns; theyasreed
for 150/. for the passage to Flushing, and that
if the vessel was brought safe back, he would
pay a hundred instead of a hundred and fiAy.
Then Binns asked when she would be ready P
Norris said, she is ready now, I was just coing
to send her away for some oysters. Binns
said, It don't matter whether I brine three,
four, or half a dozen. I answered, It is no
matter how many you bring; when you
come I shall be ready. Then he told me he
should be down again on Sunday ; I told him
I thought he could not be back by Sun-
day. He said, why not? this was Friday
night, he could be down again by Monday.

Did he say he was going up to town then P
Yes, and meant to be down on Sunday; and
I saw no more of him till I saw him a prisoner
at Canterbury.

Did Norris hold any more conveKsatiom
with him than what you have stated? — No.

Was any mention made of any security for
this boat?-— Binns said he would wish to se-
cure the money in the hands of Mr. Claris at
Canterbury; Norris said he would wish to
have the money in the bank at Canterbury ;
Mr. Binns said, the money was as well in the
bulk at London as in the bank at Canterbury;
he would rather have it at the bank at Lon^
don than the bank at Canterbury; he did
not want all the country to know all his busi-
ness. I said there was no call for it ; that so
much money might be put in the bank at
Canterbury, and the people net know the
business neither.

Was there or not any agreement made?^-
Yes, there was an agreement.

What was the agreement?—- Three hundred

fuineas for the security of the vessel, a hun-
red and fifty pounds for the passage, if they
cauie back directly, and if they took a cargo
back a hundred jpound for carrying them
there ; then I left nim, and saw bim no more
till I saw him in custody.

Mr. Justice Buller, — Was it at last agreed
that the three hundred pounds should be
lodged in the bank at Canterbury ?— -Yei.

1503J 38 GEORGE IIL Trial ofO'CUdgly. O'Connor and others [1904

John Foreman sWorn.-— Examioed by
Mr. Attorney General.

What are you ?— > A seaman.

Do you remember seeing any of the persons
that are now at the bar, upon Friday the 3Srd
of February last ?— I know none of them but
Mr. Binns ; he was along with me.

Did he come to yon upon any business ? —
Yes ; he told me he was recommended to lae
by Mr. Mahoney, of Canterbury ; he tnauired
of me fur one Mr. Appleton; I askea him
which, there were several Appletous; he said
he did not rightly know, but he thought his
name was Thomas Appleton.

Did he tcli you what he wanted?— I told
him Thomas Appleton was up at Chatham
with his vessel, which was repairing at the
carpenter's.

Did he tell you aAer that what be wanted P
—He asked me then if I knew one Mr. Ma-
honey ; I told him no, I knew no such man ;
I asked him, what is he ? he said, he is a fish-
monger, and sells oysters. Oh! said I, I
know who you mean ; that is Mr. Mahon.

You were puzzled, hearins him called Ma-
honcv, instead of Mahon ?— Yes.

What farther passed between you P— Then
he asked me if he could get a vessel to go on
the other side. I wanted to know where ; he
said to Flushing ; I told him no ; there was
an embargo laid, and I dk) not think it was
possible to gel the vessel away from there
again. He told me he thought he could.

After he told you he couldget it away, what
farther passed ?— Then he asked roe whether
he could go to France ; whether Dunkirk or
Flushing was nighest ; I told him Dunkirk.

Did be mention any other places?— Yes, he
mentioned Calais, and Havre de Grace;
Havre, as we call it. He asked me which
vas the nighest port in France to our place ;
I told him Calais ; he said he had rather be
in France than Flushing, because he was bet-
ter acquainted there than at Flushing.
. Had you any conversation how long you
were to stop in France?— I sent to Mr. Nor-
ris, who was the owner of the vessel, about
the vessel.

Did Norris come up to you ?—• 'Yes.
What passed when Norris came up between
Norris and Binns?— -When he came up we
went into the sign of the Red Lion.

And Norris and Edward Appleton were
with vou ? — Yes ; when we came there, I
aaid, here is a man wants to go on the other
side.

The prisoner was not at the Red Lion f —
No.

Norris, Appleton, and you, had some talk
at the Red Lion ; now we will not trouble you
to state that; but after you had that conversa*
tion, you went and saw Mr. Binns?— Yes.

WJiere ?— At Kilchingham's the Duke of
Cumberland.

What passed there between Binns and any
of these people?— Ht agreed to ^fc a hun-

dred and fifty pound for the vesatfl to go over^
and one hundred pound a month for three
months in case the embargo wafe sot taken
ofi^, in case the ship ahould be stopped ; that is
all I know of the matter.

Was there any talk in what bank Uiis mo-
ney was to be placed 7— He was to leave it in
Mr. Claris*s hand.

Who said that ? — Mr. Binns wanted to leave
it in Mr. Ciaris's hand.

Was there any objection made to that ?•— No,
not to that ; Mr. Norris said be did not care
much about it ; he would as lief have it there
as kept in the bank.

There was a talk about the Canterbury
bank ? — Yes.

Was there any talk about what number of
people were to go over ? — ^Yes; he asked me
whether the vessel could carry three or four
more persons besides himself, and a few trunks
and boxes ; I told him there could be no ob-*
jection, I dared say, to that.

Was the vessel to carry any cargo if she
went abroad ?^ She was not to carry any caigo
there.

Was she to brine any crap back again ? — If
she got any freight Lack, she was to be
freighted directljr, and then it was to be but a
hundred and thirty pound in the room of a
hundred and fifty pound, if she came back di-
rectly and did not stop, if he could have got
any thing to freight her with.

Did any of you let Mr. King, the officer
atWhitstable know any thing amiut thisf —
No, not till after they were taken ; we knew
what we aimed at.

You suspected a little, perhaps .'--^We
knew what he was by his talk, to be sure we
did.

John Foreman cross-examined by Mr.

Gurney.

You seem, from the manner of giving your
evideiice,to be quite an old acquaintanceoftbe
attorney-general's ; you have been often in the
exchequer, have not you ?— -I do net know but
I have.

<rhe next time you saw Mr. Btnas after you
saw him at ^M^ntstabley was in custody at
Canterbury P — Yes.

Can you recollect saving to him there aeme-
thins hke this ** you thought to hang me, but
now! will take care and be even with you f'*
— I did not say that ; it was Mr. Twopeaj
came to me —

I am askine you as to what you said to Mr.
Binns, when ne was in custody at Canterburv.
Upon your oath, did not you use Uiose words
*< you thought to hang me, but I wtU be even
with you?''— N0| I never said any audi
words.

Did you not say any thing like it I — Mr.
Twopeny asked me lo comein ; I said I would
not go to London without I saw the msa, to
know whether it was the men or not.
' Mr. Justice Butler, — ^Did yoa, upon any
ecoaswn, say to any body thai yon wonU m

13061

fvr High Truum*

even with Bions?--! said, I will t«U you whftt
Mr. Williams (be went by tbat name Ihea) I
•aid^ Mr. Williams, you would not have mind*
edy if I bad carried you over banginc me; but
1^ DtTer said a word about hangiog pirn.

Mr. Gttntry.-^-Upon your oatb, you did not
make use of tbe pnrase, that you would be
even with him?— I will take my oath of it,
and fortv oaths.

Mr. Jutomey General, — You said to Binna
be would not have minded banging you ? —
Yes.

When you saw Blnns at that time, did he
know you, or affect not to know you?— He
did not like to own that he knew me; I knew
bira.

Did you tell him at that time that you knew
bim ? — Yes» to be sure I did, or I should not
have taken ihe trouble to have gone to Lon*
don.

Mr. Gttniey.— Have you never uttered any
declarations of enmity towards Binns ? have
you never said, at anv time since, that if you
could have got him half way over the water,
you would have drowned bim ?— No.

You have never said that since you have
been in this town ? — I have not.

Nor any thing to that effect P^No, I have
never said any thing at all about him*

When you were here last time, I mean P —
No, I never had such a thought : I never said
a word about him.

TkomM Norris sworn.— Examined by Mr.

AUott.

Where do you live ?— At Heme Bay.

How far is that from Whitstable ?^ About
five or six miles.

Are you owner or^naster of a vessel P^Part
owner of a vessel.

Do you remember being tent for to so to
V^hitstable on Friday roornuig the SSd of F&<
bruarr ? — Yes.

Did you see either of those gentlemen at
Whitstable ? — Yes, I saw that gentleman in
the middle (Binnt),

What name did he call himself by then ?
— He did not call himself by name; he
only mentioned before we parted, *' Then I
William Williams, will deposit so much no-
Bey in the hands of the banker, for the secu*
rity of you."

Who went with you when you went to
him?— John Foreman and Edward Apple*
ton.

The two witnesses that have been just exa-
mined ?— Yes.

What was the bouse at which you saw him P
— ^The Duke's-head, kept by one Mr. Kitch*
ineham.

when you went there to bun, vrbai was tbe
subject of your conversation ?— They told him
I was the person they had sent for respecting
tbe vessel. He asked me if I could let him a
vessel to go to Flushing ; I told bim it was a
dangerous business in war time, and that it
was very pvobabl^f «> ibey ivcre fiaglislunen^

A. D. 1798. (1500

that tbey would be detained aa prtsooers of
war. As to that, he said, it would be no sucb
thine, for be would insure the veseel to return
safe oack.

What answer did you make to that P— I
told him I thought it was a very hazardoua
thine.

What did he say about the price P<*-*I said I
should leave it to Mr. Appleton, and if be 1^
no olyection to tbe price, I should like to eo
if he undertook to do it; I told him I should
not like to go without I had security for the
value of tbe vessel ; he asked me what it was;
I told him three hundred guineas, and tlmt I
should farther demand, if slie was stopped, a
hundred pound a month for three montha if
she was detained there : he asked me how
that could be managed ; I told him I should
like the money to he deposited in one of the
Canterbury banks: be asked me if itoould
not be as well put in the bands of one Mr.
CUrts, or another penoa of Canlerhuiy,
which I objected to, not knowing either of
those people ; well, he sakl, it was not mate-
rial alMMit that, he asked me what I would
have for the passage, I told him a hundred
and fifty pounds ; he got up then and asked
me if I thought he was a child, he would give
no such money, he said that a vessel could
take a cargo from Flushing to make good tha
freight for her back : I told him that was a
very dangerous piece of business, so he then
asked if we could take him to cither Dunkirk
Calais, or Havre, that he would rather go to
either of those planes than to Flushing.

Did he give any reason why be would ra-
ther go to either of those places than to
Flushing ?— I did not ask bim aqy reason,
nor he did not eiveany : he said that the ves-
sel would not oe detained more than three
hours ; that he should return instantly in her
if he went to either of the ports.

Did he say how many people were to goP
—I will tell you presently; Mr. Appleton
who was master of the vessel, obieelod to
going to either of those ports, he said be was
not capable of taking the vessel to either of
the plaoes except Flushing ; he said, if she
gees to Flushing what will you have provided
she brings back a crop ; I said, if she brings
any thing back I will have a hundred oound,
which was agreed upon ; then he asked when
the vessel would be ready for sea, I told him
she would be ready at any time, for she was
then ready to eo for a freieht of ovsters; be
said he thought he should be readv by Sun-
day, and it ended by saying " I William Wil-
liams deposit this money tor your security in
the Canterbury bank :*' then he took his leave
of us.

You mentioned just now you would tell us
by and by somethmg that was said, as to how
many people were to go with him ?— He eaid,
would it make any difierence in the price re-
specting the <}uantity of people that went with
bim ; I told him no ; be said perhaps three or
four more might go with him 1 1 told bim the

1307] S8 GEORGfi III. Tridqf (fCoi^, O'Connor and oihen £1306

vessel might at W9ll carry eight or ten as
oDe when she was hired.

Do you recollect whether any thing was
said about baggage f-^I did not hear a word
said iabout baggage.

Thomat Norrit cross-examined by Mr. Dalla$,

How long did this conversation last between
you and Mr. Binns? — It is impossible for me
to say how long it lasted, we wer6 in two se-
parate rooms m'st ; in a small room by our-
selves when we were conversing about the
business.

I take for granted as you were making a
bargain you had a great deal of conversation
on the subject? — Not a great deal, the time
was short.

How long might it last altogether ? — ^I was
not more than an hour in his company.

You had never been in his company before,
nor have since f — No.

In the course of that conversation before
any thing was said about depositing three
hundred pounds, did you not understand that
Mr. Binns was not himself goins in the ves-
sely that he wanted it for some mends? — ^He
said for himself.

Yes, originally, but at last he told you he
wouldj return with the vessel, and it would
not be detained above three hours ? — Yes.

Robert Campbell sworn — examined by Mr.

Garrow,

You are I beUeve a pilot at Deal ? — ^I am.

Do you remember, on Saturday the S4th of
February, any person calling upon you«md
producing this letter from Claris to youf — It
was brought to me by that person (Binns) on
Saturday the 24th of February.

At what time of day was it that he came to
you ?— Nearly at noon.

Did you opfsn the letter and read it? — I
did.

Were you acquainted with Clio Rickman ?
-—I was.

Upon reading the letter, what did you say
to Mr. Binns, by what name did you address
him ?-*-By the name of Williams ; I asked
him his business, he told me that he wished
to get a passage to Flushing; I told him I
thought it was at present impossible, as there
was an embargo laid at Flushing.

Did you add any thing more?— -I did, I
said that the only method for him to proceed
would be to eo to Yarmouth, and go by the
way of Hamburgh.

What answer did Williams make to that ?—
He said that the person was afraid of being
terved.

What did you understand bv that ?<— I sup-
posed he meant from the Extnequer.

What did you sav upon that ? — I said, then
it is not yourself^ he said no, I do not know
that I shall go mvself.

What more did vou say about the pont ?^I
told him he bad better wait, that the. port
loighl be opened.

What answer dkl he make to that ?— No
particular answer, he seemed to be quite en-
tirely comfortable upon the business; I asked
him to sit down to dinner with me ; he did,
and from thence we went to the lloyal Oak,
and he seemed very comfortable there.

Did he put any more questions upon the
subject? — I saw Mr. Hay man coming, and I
knew he had used Flushing, I had some con*
versation with him.

After that, had you any conversation with
the prisoner, Binns, respecting the price ? —
He asked me the price in my own house ; he
asked me what I thought it might cost him ;
I told him fif\y or sixtv guineas ; he said he
thought that a great deal of money ; then I
went with him to the Royal Oak.

After your conversation with Hay man did
you communicate the subject of it to Mr.
Williams ?'I told him that there was no like*
lihood of his getting across then, or words to
that purport.

What dui he say to that ?— That be must
wait.

Did you set him and Hayman to talk toge-
ther?—Yes.

Did you hear the conversation that took

Klace between Hayman and him after you
ad put them tofrether ? — I did.

Wnat did you near pass between them? —
It was no more than seneral conversation,
there were a great nunober of people sitting
in the room.

What was that conversation about ? — ^I do
not recollect.

Do you know a person of the name of
Mow]e?-^Ye8. '

Did any .conversation pass between vou
and Williams after Hayman came in, in which
the name of Mowle occurred? — ^Yes, I said 1
might, in all probability, be out of the way
when he might come down again as he pro-
mised : in the course of two or three days, be
said he might come down.

What was to be done in case you were out ?
— I mentioned that >he might act with Mr.
Mowle the same as he might with me, that if
a boat was going across that the person might
have a passage.

Was any thine sud about trunks or bag-
gage ? — When that was proposed he asked me
whether two or three trunks would be any
obstniction, or there woidd be any objection
to that; I told him none at all. .

Was any thing said about what should be
done, if the trunks should come when you
were out ?~Mr. Hayman told him be roiglii
bring them to hb house, as being an uphol-
sterer.

Did you go with Williams any where after
you bad b^n to the Royal Oak? — I did, I
went to get a post chaise to goto Canterbury,
and he said he was going to London.

Did be tell you how soon he was ^ing to
London, and expected to be back aeam? — He
said be would wish to be at London in the
morning, and would be back again in a fdtw
days.

1309]

Jur High Tfeasoni

A. D. 1798.

cisia

Did he a88u;n any reason to you for wiab;
ing to go to Jjondoa immediately P — No, be
assigned no reason.

Lancelot Hayman sworn.-r-Examined by Mr.

Adam,

You are an upholsterer and live at Deal ?
—Yes.

Do you remember being at the Royal Oak,
the 94lh of February ? — Yes.

Was Mr. Campbell there ?— Yes.

Was either of the prisoners there ? — Yes,
Mr. B'tnns.

What name did he go by P — ^The name of
Wiil'tams.

Do you remember having any conversation
vtth him respecting lodgmg his trunks at
your house ?— -Yes, Mr. Campbell asked my
permission to let Mr. Williams, a friend of
his» send two or three portmanteaus of clothes
to my house.; I agreed to it.

Was he present? — He was.

Was your address taken at the time?—
Yes.

Who wrote it down ?— I believe Mr. Bay-
bam.

He was in the company at the time?— Yes.

Uow was it written ?— I believe with a pen-
cil.

To whom was it given ? — I do not xecol-
lect.

Who askedfor your address?— Mr. Binus.

Then it was written for him by Mr. Bar-
ham ? — ^Yes.

Do you remember seeing the prisoner at
any otiier time ? — I saw him on the Monday
evening following. .

Was he alone then, or had he any body
with him P — Alone.

Where did vou see him that evening ?-— At
the Royal Oak again.

What passed between you and him then?
— Mr. Campbell informed the prisoner on the
94th, that he was going to London, and he
asked me if Mr. Campbell had returned from
London, I told him I did not know, but I
would inquire the next morning, which I did.

Did any thing more pass that evening be-
tween you and the prisoner ? — Not that I re-
collect.

Did you see him next morning? — I in-
formed him that Mr. Campbell was not at
home.

This was upon Monday the 26th of Febru-
ary ? — Yes.

Did you go to any body else ? — I did not.

Do you remember any thing passing be-
tween you and Mr. Binns respecting Mr.
Mowie P— On Saturday the 94th, when Mr.
Campbell Informed the prisoner, he was go-
ing out of town, he recommended him to Mr.
MowIe ; I informed him on Tuesday morning
following, that. Mr. MowIe was at home, and
that Mr. Campbell was not.

Did you go with him to Mr. Mowle? — I
did hot.

Where did you go with him ? — No where,
I saw him at the Three Kings at Deal.

Who was with him when yOu saw him
there ?—! do not know, there was a second
person* in the room.

Look at the prisoners again, do you sec
that second person ? — Not there to my know-
Mge; there was a second person in the room,
but I did not see his face ; when I entered the
room the second gentleman was standing with
bis face tcMvards the fire.

The second gentleman was a stranger to
you ?— Totally.

This was at the Three Kings?— Yes, oa
Tuesday morning.

How was the gentleman dressed, who stood
with his face to the fire P — He had a long
straight drab coloured coat on, the other part
of his dress I cannot speak to.

Was it a great coat ? — I do not recollect.

Was it a coat like any ol these that lie upon
the table?

Mr. Daiias, — He has said he. does not re-
collect.

IVitneu, — ^I do hot know the make of the
coat, but it was a coat somethine about that
colour, and it was nearly of that kind.

Dki you attend to the cut of that person's
hair? — I did not

Dki you return to your shop from the Three
Kings P — I did.

Did you see any thing more of Mr. Wil-
liams, after that? — I did on the Tuesday
morning after I informed him Mr. Mowb
was at Dome, Mr. Binns met Mr. Mowle by
the corner of my shop, and there a conversa-
tion took place respecting the possibility of
providing a boat.

Did you hear that conversation? — I did;
Mr. Mowle told Mr. Binns he thought it was
impracticable.

What passed between Binns and him in
your hearing? — Mr. Binns said to Mr. Mowle
he wanted a passage to Flushing for two or
three friends, Mr. Mowle said he did not
know of any possibility of going, he gave for
reason that he knew of no conveyance, I do
not recollect that he gave any other reason.

Did Mr. Binns say why he wished to
hire a vessel to go to Flushing ?— He said he
wanted to get a conveyance fur two or three
friends, but that he himself was not going.

Where did he say he wanted to go to P —
The first place was Flushing, I believe a se-
cond place named was Calais.

Any other place? — None that I heard;
I Mowle answered the same as before,- that he
knew of no fit conveyance.

What did Binns say to that? — I dont re-
member that he made any reply.

Did he mention any other place that be
was ^oing to from Deal ? — None that I heard.

Did he say any thing about his baggage, or
any thing of that kind ?-~Nothing more than
I have Mfore observed, that I jgave my con-
sent for three or four trunks bemg sent to my
shop.

Did he say where they were to come from?
—I did not hear tha^

151 1} 38 GEORGE III. Triai o/O^Odgl^, (TConnar and oihert [IdlS

room sothoUme id th€ course of ibtt conver-
lacion; and Mr. Binns then declared his
name something in these words, he said, ** I
think it may he necessary to inform you who
I am, my name is John Binns, perhaps you
may recollect my name." — I did recollect it
then, and nothing farther took place, except-
ing that Mr. Binns, in the course of convert
aalion, declared he was not certain he should
go himself.

Who was to go then ? — ^Ile mentioned no
names, but for three or four friends. I
believe he repeated that more than once or
twice.

Was there anv conversation about luggaee >
•*— Mr. Binns asked Campbell whether a lew
trunks would be any incumbrance to the
heat or objection, he said not at all; Knns
asked for an address of where he might direct
the lujEgage, whether he misht send them to
Camp&eirs ; Campbell said he might, by all
means, but as his was a private house, and he
probably roighl be out upon bh profession, if
Hayman would take them in for him, being a
tbaA in public businesef it might be more
convenient. Mr. Hayman agreed to do it;
Binns palled out a book to set down his ad-
dressy Hayman was called out of the house at
that moment, and he desired me to nut
down hit name for that purpose, which I aid.

Look at this, is this the address you wrote,
and which you delh^ered to Binns ?«^No, I
do not believe this is my writinr. I did
write Hayman*8 address, on a leaf of a pocke(-
book.

Of whose peGkei-book?-*Oii a leaf of a
pocket-book of Binns's, being written in
pencil, I am not able to sfMsaf to that; I
cannot believe this to be my hand-writing.

Look at the address in this pocket*b«>k ?
— ^This is my hand-writing, I wrote it m this
pocket-book, which Binns produced and deli-
vered it to him.

Mr. Justice Builef^^Vf haX is that pockef-
book.

Mr^ Oarrow* — 6inns*s pocket-book. Dki
you state what posaOd upon t)he subject of the
price r-^I think the sum of 60/. vras men-
lioned, but I do not recollect that it was a
positive agreement

Mr. Gerrov.-^We will read first the direc-
tion in Binns's pocket-book, written by the
present witness.

Did be, before be parted with yoii, say
where he was going to m Kent ?— Not that I
remember.

Do you know wliat time he left Deal upon
the Tuiraday ?-— It was about noon that thift
eouTersation ended by my shop with Mr.
Mowle.

Did he say any thing to you before he lefl
your shop, of where he was going to, after he
should leave Deal ? — I do not remember lib
mentionine any place. He left me, and I saw
no more of him.

Tkama* Barham sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Carrow.

Are you of any profession at Deal P— A
grocer.

Do you recollect upon Saturday the 24th of
February iaet, being present with Mr. Hay-
man, and any other person, when you wrote
•ay direction .^-^Yes.

Do you see any body here that was in conv-
-pany with them ?-^Mr. Binns was in company
then.

Do you know him by that name ? — He was
introduced to me by the name of Williams,
but he declared before he left the company
that his name was Binns. The company was
originally a public one, but after a short space,
the company had one by one left the room,
excepting Mr. Binns, Mr. Campbell, Mr.
Hayman, and myself. Mr. Campbell intro-
duced Mr. Binns to me by the name of Wil-
liame, as a friend of his, saying he was a man
in i^trese^ and wanted to go on the mitbr side
of the water. I do not immediately recollect
what reply I made upob that.

Dkl Mr. Binns make any reply to that, or
correct that statement? — Not immediately.
Flushme seemed to be the objiect; Mr.
Carapbdl raised an objection to that, and said
Calais was theproperest place.

What objectton did he state to Flushing?-^
I do not immediately recollect, whether it
was because it was not so handy lor the pas-
sage as Calais; but 1 do not recollect that
Any particular reason was assigned: the con-
Tprsation was in general terms about the
probability of getting a beat for the purpose
of going across the water, when the terms
were mentioned, I think a sum of money
w«ts mentwned by Mr. Campbell, as necessary
for that purpose, but he said ne could noteffeet
ibis puipose himself, but must have the assist-
smee ef others^course ; and those friends that
he meant to employ in that expedition, were
fiot then at home ; mentioning Mr. Mowle,
and one or two others, who, i>eing pilots,
were up vrith ships in their profession, but
•would return on Monday, Tuesday, or Wed-
Besdav, and probably would do what he re^
quired of them ; but he could say nothing
■NM-e than that there was a probability of his
getting over to some place.

When Calais was mentioned, did Williams
Make anjr objection to Calais f— I do not re-
collect that he did. V^r. Campbell left the

[It was read.]

" Mr. L. Hayman, jnn.

** Middle-Slieet *'

Mr. Oarrew. — We will now read this paper
proved to haive been found in Mr. O'Connor's
purse.

[It was read.]

'< Mr. L. Hayman, jun.

** Auctioneer,

<• Middle Street,

*Deal.'^

ISIS]

fair High Treason,

James £//ib# sworn.— Examined by Mr.'

Fielding.

Do you keep the Three Kines' hotel, in
BeaH-Yes.

Look at the gentlemen at the bar ; do you
know the persons of any of them ? — ^Two of
them.

Which ?— Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Binns.

Did you see them, or either of them, at
Deal, on the S6tb of February P— Yes, I saw
them both.

Were they in company together, or not? —
They were in company together.

At what time did they come to your house ?
— ^Thcy came together to my house, on the
25th of February, at six in the evening.

How did they come?— On foot.

First of all describe, if your recollection
will serve, how they were dressed ? — Mr.
O'Connor was dressed in a straight drab co-
loured coat; hiffh up in the collar, with metal
buttons, I think rather tarnished, cut straight
down the thighs.

What was the other part of his dress ?— I
do not recollect, he was buttoned close up.

How was Binns dressed ?— I think he had
a brown great coat on, with a black collar,
rather rough.

You showed them into a Tooro, I presume?
— The waiter did.

How long did they continue at vour house ?
— ^Till the following morning about ten or
eleven o'clock.

Had you any conversation with them during
the evening ? — None.

Did they sleep at your house?— Yes.

Did thev brmg any baggage or clothes
with them r— None.

Did any people from Deal visit them at
your house?— Yesj Mr. Hayman.

You were not m company with them at
the time Mr. Hayman visited them, were you ?
— I was not.

Had vou any conversation with them,
during the time they staid in your house ?
— ^Never, no farther than waiting upon them.

At what time was it that they left your
house ? — About ten or eleven o'clock.

Did you see them aAer that time ?— I did
not, they turned out to the left, and walked
down the street.

You have no doubt as to their persons ? —
None.

Jeremiah Mowle sworn. — Examined by Mr.

AbbaU,

What are you, and where do you live ?-^I
am a pilotj and live at Deal.

Do you know Mr. Hayman, of Deal ?-—
Yes.

Do you remember being with him in the
evening of Monday the SOth of February
last?— No, not on the S6tb, it was Tuesday
the 27tli in the forenoon.

Do you know the person of that stranger,
whom you then met?— Yes, it is the man
who sUnds in the middle {Binns).
"" VOL. XXVL

A. D. 1798. [IS14

Did he call himself by any name then
that, you heard? — Not to me; I was told
his name was Williams, but not till after Mr.
Campbell came from London.

Where did Hayman and you go together ?^-
Into a room at Hay man's house.

When you came there, what wm said ?—
Binns requested a passage for Flushing.

What answer did you give him ? — I told
him there was not any probability at present*
it might be a month or two months, I could
not in fact tell when there might be. He
said could not he go to Calais. — I told him no
one there would run the risk of going to
Calais. I before this had observed that the
boat or the party might be detained; he said
he did not conceive there was any danger of
that.

Did he say where he was going from Deal ?
—He said he was going to Margate.

Did he mention for what purpose he was
going to Margate ? — He said he had a port-
manteau, or two portmanteaus and a saddle.

Did he say what he was to have done with
them? No farther. than Hayman's telling
him he was welcome to send them to his
house, that he would put them into his ware-
house, and take care of them.

Was any thing said about the price in your
presence ? — ^Not a word.

Was any thing farther said upon the sub-
ject ? — Not another word ; that was all that
passed, the man then went away.

Did Hayman go with him ? — ^No, he went
away by himself.

William Jones sworn. — Examined by Mr*
Solicitor General.

You are, I believe, a waiter at the Three
Kings at Deal ? — ^Yes.

Do you know either of the prisoners at the
bar ?— Yes, Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Binns.

Do you remember their being at your mas-
ter's house ? — Yes.

When?— The S6th of February.

What .day of the week was .that? —
Monday.

What time did they come there ? — In th^
evening, between five and six, to the best of
my knowledge. I showed them into a room.

Did you i^ee them when they came in?
— No, I did not, hut I attended on them.

How long did they stay there?— That nigh^,
and part of^he next morning.

At what time did they go away ?— Between
the hours of ten and eleven, as near as I can
recollect.

Did they say where they were going? —
No.

How did they go away ? — On foot.

Look at that book ; have you seen it be-
fore?— Yes, it was left in the room they
sat in.

Was aiiy thing said to you about that book ?
— One of'^the gentl^ruen told me to take
care of the book, they should be back again
presently.

4 P

Iil6^ 88 GEORGE III. Trial o/ffCoigty, &ih)nnor and others [l^li

Did Ihcy ever return ?-— No.

Mr. Hugh Bell sworn.—- ExamiAed by Mr.
Attgme^ GeueraL

^ou live^ I believe, in Charurhouse-sqaate?
—Yes.

You are a merchant in the city of London ?
—Yes.

Do you know the gentleman at the bar,
V^T. O'Connor?^! have known him for along
time past. •

Do you know the person who sits next to
him (O'Coigly) ?— Yes.

Do you know any other of the prisoners? —
I know Mr. O'Connor's servant (Leary), and
I have seen Mr. Binns once or twice, but
have no intimacy with him.

Where did you see Mr. Binns? — Once or
twice at my own bouse.

Did he come there to call upon you, or upon
any body elsef — ^He came certainly to call
upon Mr. O'Connor.

Was Mr. O'Connor in the habit of dining
occasionally with you? — Yes, frequently.

And sleeping at your house? — UccasionaUy
aleefiing at my house.

Did he dine with you on Saturday the 94th
of February last?— To the best of my recol-
fection he md.

Did any other of -the prisoners dine with
you u))on that day?— I do not recollect that
any other of them dined with mc on that day.

bid a person of the name of captain Jones
dine with you on that day? — He might have,
but whether he did or not I do not recollect ;
he dined at my Uble twice, but whether that
was one of the days I do not recollect.

How long is it since you have forgot that?
—I do not know that I have forgot it ; I diH
not say that he did not, but I do not posi-
tively recolleol that he did ; if I recollected
accurately that he had, I should say so.

Did he dine with you within that week ? —
I ratber think he did, he dined twice with me
I koow.

In company with Mr. O^Connor ?— In com-
pany with Mr. O'Connor.

wks he introduced to you by Mr. O'Con-
por ?— Certainly only by Mr. O'Connor.

By what name was he introduced to you ? —
By the name of captain Jones.

Did Mr. O'Connor tell you that his name
was captain Jones ?— To the best of my recol-
lection he did.

Have you any idea that any body else ever
told you that his name was captain Jones ?
—No.

Have vou any doubt that Mr. O'Connor
told you his name was captain Jones ?— I have
no. doubt but that was the name by which I
knew him.

And they dined twice together with you, you
say?— They did so.

How lately, before Blr. O'Connor left Lon-
don, did he dine with you?— I before .said,
that I eannot be accumte whether it wts Sa-
turday the 9ith.

1

Was it upon a Saturday f^I cannot iceol-
lectf because the ifirhoTe of captain Joncs'a
calhng at ny house did hot eiceed ten or
eleven days.

He did call in the course ofthe t^n or eleveo
days before Mr. 0*Conno^ left you?— Yes,
he did.

How oflen might he call at your house in
the course of those ten or eleven days ? — J
cannot say, because I am very much abroad.
I am not asking you what you do not know,
but what you do know of your own know-
ledge ?^To my knowledge he called foulr or
five times.

Did he call upon you, or upon Mr. CCbn-
nor ? — Upon Mr. O'Connor.

How ohen did he dine in com^y with
Mr. O'Connor at your house ? — ^Twice.

Do you mean to tell the jury that you can-
not recollect in what part of those ten dayait
was these two dinners were, whether the be-
ginning, the middle, or the end?— The first
time he dined was the first time I saw him ;
the second time I do not know whether it wat
the last day or not

Will you take upon yourselftosay itwas
in the middle of the time ?— I will not

Will you take upon yourself to say it was
not upon the last day ?— I will not; I said ao
before.

Did yon direct any letter, at the iilstanee of
Mr. O'Connor, upon Saturday the S4th?—
Not that I recollect

' Look at that direction, is not that your
hand-writing? — It is.

At whose mstance did vou write that ad-
dress upon that letter ?^-Tnat I cannot tell.

Mr. Bell, you are a merchant in Charter-
house-square; you have directed a letter,
which bears date the 34th of February, to Mr.
William Williams ; do you mean to say 700
cannot tell at whose instance you directea it>
•— I do, for 1 have no recollection of directins
ft at all, nor should I know that I ever haa
directed it, but that I know my own hand-
writing.

You mean to swear, that if it was not fbr ita
being your own hand-writing, you dimdd have
no recollection that you ever directed it? —
Positively.

You do swear it is your hand-writin(^ and
that you did direct it ?— Yes, from its netog
my hand-writing.

Have you any correspondent of thU namit
— None.

Why, Mr. Bell, have vou never sdd at
whose instance you directed it ?-^t never have«
You, however, did direct that letter?— 1
directed it.

Pray, Mr. Bell, do you know a person oTtlle
name of^ William WflliAms ?— 1 do not

Do you mean lo fiTf then, thal^fouiii-
dressed that letter ** Hr.'Wir
Foimtain-inn^ .Caat^lNity,^ ao UM^H''^
bruary, 1798; biit that you lui<w Yilluiltajteat
recoUection how you came to 'wOiiM^Jmm*
ter ?— I diitict a gMVneiDy )^tMi'knitfStjf

aii7}

jfer Higi Ttea$fm-

A. D. 179S.

[lais

of my life, »nd if tfus lettafioraay olher^wits
b^oi^ht to me by « servant, or any bo^ elMw
to direct, I should do it with a great deal of
pleasiirey and it would make do impression,
probably, upon me; in this case it has not.

IMr. 0*Connor lefV your bouse on Sunday
morning?— I did not see him on Sunday
morning. I

Did not be sleep at your house on Saturdij
mkhtP*-! believe he did.

Do not you know he did?— I was spbed be-
Ibre him.
Have you any doubt about it P— No.
Upon youf oath, do you know where Mr.
O'Cbnnor was going from your house?-rI
understood that he vras going into Kent.

I aak you if you did not know it from Mr.
O'Connor himself ?— Yes, Mr. O'Connor told
me he was going iato Kent.

Why did not you my so then ?— I think the
word underUood was sufficiently expressive
of that, because I did not accompany Mr.
O'Connor.

Did Mr. O'Connor's baggage go from your
Imiise ?-— I believe it did.
How was it directed P— I do not know.
Did any baggage go from your house di«
recled " Colonel Morris ^ ? — ^Nbtto my know-
ledsp.

You admit, however, that that direction is
your hand-writing ?— Yes.

Whom is it directed to ?— " Mr. William
Williams, Fountain-inn, St Margaret-street,
Canterbury."

Had you any letter from Mr. O'Connor be-
iweeen the Sunday and the Wednesday ?— To
the best of my recollection I had a letter from
Kent.
What is become of itP^I have it not
Do you know what became of it ?*-I believe
I destroyed it ; the purpote of the letter was
aerved bv my reading it
Is it destroyed ?^It is.
If it is destroyed, what name was at the
bottom of it ?— James Wallis.

How do you know that that letter, which
was signed James Wallis, was a letter from
Mr. 0%onnor ? — I only concluded so from the
subject of it, and the matter of it.

Did Mr. O'Connor tell you, before be leA
London, that he would write to you ? — ^I really
do not recollect that he did ; I might wish to
hear from Mr. O'Connor, but I do not recol-
lect that he promised to write to me.

Did you destroy that letter yourself, or
ipve it to any body else to destroy ?— The let*
ter was destroyed before I knew of Mr.
Ot>mnor's being taken into custody.

Did you destroy it yourself, or did you give
it to any body else to destroy ?— I destroyed
the letter myself.

Why did you destroy it P—Because the let-
ter was of no moment, of no use, it merely in-
finrnwd me of his bmng in Kent

Mr. Pltffii^r.r~What signifies what his reft-
•en wasi that is no eividence against us.
Mr. AUom^ OeiMrdt»-rife w§% be re-

ceived a letter between the Sunday and the
Wednesday, which letter was ugned James
Wallis, which he knows to be from the pri-
soner, aod which he destroyed.

Mr. Justice Btti/er.— Did you know^ any
p«>rson of the name of James Wallis ?— No ; I
knew no other person of that name but a ser-
vant of mine.

Mr. Justice Bafier.-^You do not know
whether either of the prisoners went by the
name of James Wallis? — ^No.

Mr. AUorne^ Ociwra/,— Then how came
you to say that that letter signed James Wallis
came from Mr. O'Connor ?— I knew by the
subject and the matter of it.

Did^ou know the hand-writing of that let*
ter which you received, signed James Wallia
when you received it P— -I was so satisfied
with the subject, and the matter, that the^
hand-writing made no sort of impression upon
my mind.

Have you any doubt whose haud«wntmg it

Mr. P/iiuwr.— I conceivehe must state facts,
not whether he apprehended it was his hand-
writing or not

Mr. Justice BaWcr.— The letter is destroyed,
he may state his reasons for thinking it Mr«
O'Connor's hand- writing. '

Mr. Da/Iat.— Even if the letter is destroyed,
I submit that he is not at liberty to state this,
I admit that he is at liberty to state the coni
tents of that letter, we have got tlie contentt
of the letter. .

Mr. Justice BttWer.— He has not steted, m
words, what the contents were, but he lias
told you, from the subject of it, that he had no
doubt it came from ^lr• O'Connor.

Mr. P/iim«r.— That is merely matter or
opinion: I conceive that saying he has no
doubt of fit, is not evidence; he may be con*
vinced in his own mind, and have an opinion
respecting a matter of fact, but that is not
evidence. ,

Mr. Attorney Gciierei.— He says, from the
subject and the matter of if, he has no doubt
that it came from the prisoner.

Mr. P/amer.— That is nothing more than
saying, that from the subject matter which he
does not possess your lordship or the jury of^
he draws a conclusion that the letter was
written by Mr. O'Connor. . .

Mr. G<intw.— Mr. Plumer's objection is m
a circle ; first, he says you have not proved
the contents, and therefore you cannot ask
the witness to it; then he' says, you cannot
ask him to the contente without proving it to
be his hand-writing.

Mr. Justice Xflwrence.— Many things, for
instance^ a conversation, may be as decisive
as the hand-writing ; Mr. Plumcr's objection
is to asking his conclusion, instead of asking
the contents of the letter, and so seeing that
his conclusion is a just one.

Mr. Garrow»'^'Do not we prove the hand-
writing of a man every day by the witness
I having corresponded with faim^ the subjeet
matter leading him to it ?

1319] 38 GEORGE IIL Trial ofO'Coigfy, O'Connor and athen [1390

* Mr. P/iuJMr.— That is where the persons

are in the habit of corresponding.
Mr. Justice Bu/lfr.— -There is another thine,

which my brother Shepherd has just suggested;

supposing the letter bad been here, could the

witness speak to any thing but an opinion of

its being the prisoner's hand-writing } he says

the subject matter is such as would convince

the mind of any reasonable man that the

letter must have come from Mr. O'Connor ;

that takes it out of the objection ; and if

neither side will ask him to the subject mat-
ter, it stands thus : that you have not traced

that fact so far as you might ; that goes to the

point of what credit the jury will give to the

evidence, and not whether it shall be received

or not.

Mr. Plumer, — I should make the same ob-
jection, if the letter had been here, to any

question of what his opinion is, to any con-

elusion he draws from the contents ; he may

state any facts from which your lordship and

the jury may draw that conclusion, but no pri*

vate opinion is evidence.
Mr. Justice Lawrence, — ^What is opinion

with respect to a man's hand-writing?

Mr. Justice BulUr^^He has said, that he

has formed. that opinion from the subject and
the matter of the letter.

Mr. Justice Lawrence, — From the hand-
writing, and from the contents, he believed it
to be Mr. O'Connor's writing ; if you wish to
see whether that belief is well founded, you
may get that out in cross-examination.

Mr. Attorney General. — ^To whom was this
Jetter, signed James Wallis, addressed? —
Addressed to me.

Did you receive it by the post, or in any
other, and what manner ?— It came by the
post.

You say you judee, by the contents of it,
that it came from Mr. O'Connor, be so good
as state what the contents of it were? — ^I
cannot ; my recollection does not lead me to
state farther than that he was there, and in
hopes of doing the business that he went
u|on.

Mr. Justice Buller, — He was there ; what
do you mean by there P— In Kent, where he
wrote from.

Mr. Attorney General. — Do you recollect
what post-town the letter came from ?— That
he was there, that he had met with a good
iua;j, to the best of my recollection, and that
be would do the business.

Mr.Justice£ti//«r.-P>Uad you any conver-
sation with him, before he left you, respecting
any business which he was to transact in
Kent ?— Not that I recollect particularly.

Mr. Justice BulUr, — Had you any conver-
sation with him about any business? — I can*
pot suy that I had about any business.

Mr. Justice ZJii/Zer^— Then how came the
expressions that he was in Kent, and in hopes
of doing the business that he went upon, to
bring Mr. O'Connor to your mind?-r-He men-
iioocd m the letter that be had found a good

man to do the buaiDessfor him ; which busi-
ness, I understood to be his desire of getting
out of the kingdom.

Mr. Justice £ir/^.— -Whom did you under-
stand that from?— Mr. O'Connor.

Mr. Attorney General — ^Leaving that sub-
ject, did you know the prisoner who sits
nearest you (O'Coigly) by any other name
than that of captain Jones ? — I did not.

Mr. O'Connor had never mendoned him
to you by any other name ?— He did not till
about the time of his departure; then I
learned that his name was not Jones.

Where did you learn that?— I understood
from Mr. O'Connor that his came was not
Jones.

What did Mr. O'Connor say to you at the
time you collected that understanding from
him, that his name was not Jones?— To the
best of my recollection, he mentioned that his
real name was O'Coigly.

Did Mr. O'Connor tell you why he used
the name of Jones ? — I do not recollect anjr
precise cause, but that he was a person who
had come from Ireland on account of the
state of politics in that country, and perhaps
did not think it discreet to ^ by his real
name, that was the only reason I conceived.

Did he mention whether he had aiw other
name than the names of Jones and O'Coigly ?
— ^No ; I never heard any other.

When was it that Mr. Binns called, was it
within the last ten days ?— Yes.

Did Mr. O'Connor sleep at your house at
all, except within the last ten days ?— Yes, be
did longer than before the last ten days ; he
slept sometimes at my house, and sometimes
at the west end of the town.

Did you happen to see Mr. Binns at all
after Mr. O'Connor led you ? — ^Yes.

When was that?— He called upon me on
the Sunday rooming of Mr. O'Connor's de-
parture, and finding that Mr. O'Connor was
gone, he went away himself inrnnediately.

Had you any conversation with him when
he called upon you ?— No farther than saying
Mr. O'Connor was gone.

What time in the morning did he call upon
you ? — I think about eight oxlock.

Did you supply Mr. O'Connor with any mo-
ney ?— I did.

To what amount ?— Near to 400/. in Louis
d'ors, but Mr. O'Connor had about 7001. al-
together.

Does it fall within your knowledge whe-
ther Mr. O'Connor has made any conveyance
of his estate before?*— No.

Had you ever received 'a letter from any

{»erson before under the name of James Wal-
ls ? — Not that I recollect

Had you ever directed a letter before to
any person under the name of Williams F — I
do not recollect; I may have, perhaps I have.
Have you any recollection of any servant
of your's applying to you upon Salurdsjy the
S4th of February, to direct such a letter ?-!j[
bave not 'f I pnay have directed a IcUet for

1321]

for High Treason*

A. D. 1798.

\132S

t^hat I know at my counting-bouse in Al*
dersgate- street.

Have you any recollection of anY person
applying to you at your counting house in
A Ider^gate- street to direct such a letter?-*!
have not.

Mr. Hugh Bell cross- exammed by Mr.

Flumer,

You have said that you have been ac-
quainted with Mr. O'Connor since he came
into England ; when did he come into Eng-
land this last time ?— Early in the month of
January.

And left your house the latter end of Fe-
bruary ? — On the 25th of February.

Do you know whether he had made any
inquiries, or did he employ jrou to make any
for him ibr the purpose of going abroad before
Mr. 0*Coigly came into this countryP — Cer-
tainly he had.

When was that?— The latter end of Ja-
nuary, perhaps between the 85th and 88th.

Did not Mr. O'Coigly come to town about
tfie middle of February?— I do not know
when he came to town, I never saw him till
the middle of February, and I never saw him
out of my own house.

And before that time you knew Mr. O'Con-
nor was going abroad ?— I did.

Did you yourself make inquiry for a vessel
for him for that purpose? — I did.

For what place ?— He wished to go to Ham-
buj^h first.

That was, I think you say, the latter end of
January ? — ^Ycs.

Did you in consequence of that, endeavour

to procure a vessel for Hamburgh for him ?

I did. '

What prevented your gettins one ?— There
were vessels for Hamburgh, but they were
delayed, as well as I can recollect, owing
to the apprehensions that the French were
verv nearly getting possession of that place,
and that delayed the vessels from sailing.

English vessels were afnud of going there ?
—Yes.

I believe there was a time when there
were six mails due from Hambureh ?— Be-
sides, the English vessels for Hamourgh at
that time sailed by convoys, and a convoy
had sailed I recollect very nearly before.

Do you happen to remember the circum-
stance that there were at one time six mails
due from Hamburgh ? — I recollect there were
several mails due ; I do not recollect the pre-
cise number ; I got him the bill of a ship and
gave it him ; but I understood one reason why
Mr. O'Connor hesitated about suing by that
ship was, the necessity that I told him, I be-
lieve, there was for a passport, which pass-
port, I understood from himself, he could not
obtain, or had doubts of obtaining.

Why could not he procure this passport?—
I really do not know, farther than that his
situation, as a public man in Ireland, might
make it difficult to obtain it here from go-
vernment.

Did you knbw that he had recently come
from Ire;land in the beginning of January ; I
did; he had called at my house before I saw
him, and he called some two or^ three days
afler, and dined with me.

Did you inauire for any other vessel besides
the Haroburgn vessel ; did you inquire for a
vessel for Embden before ever you saw Mr.
O'Coigly .^— Yes, before I saw him ; for I
never inquired after.

Were you able to obtain one ?— There was
a vessel for Embden, but it was to sail very
soon, and to the best of my recollection Mr.
O'Connor could not be ready ; it was in one,
two, or three days, it was to sail.

You have been asked by the attorney-gene-
ral, about these Louis d*ors; do you know
whether Louis d'ors are the coin best for cir-
culation upon the continent at this time?-^I
know nothing of that fact, I believe they ai«
in circtilation.

Is that a coin which would be most conve-
nient for a gentleman travelling on the conti-
nent?—I so understood ; but I was never on
the continent myself.

At the time you got them, was there a dis.
count upon the louis d'ors f-— The louis d'or
appeared to me, at that time, comparing the
Hamburgh exchange, to be a good remit-
tance at nineteen shillings.

That is a profit of five per cent ?— That de-
pends entirely upon the state of the exchange.

You have been asked about what Mr.
O'Connor told you respecting Mr. O'Coigly;
did he not at the same time tell you that this
eentleman was under the necessity of leaving
Ireland, that he was a fugitive firom Ireland
like himself, and was going out of the king-
dom ?— He did so.

Did he not also inform you that there were
reasons why neither that person nor he could
stay in Ireland nor in England, with respect
to themselves? — ^With respect to Mr. O'Coigly
he' did not go that leneth, but he did with re-
gard to hiniself ; that ne leA Ireland because
he was threatened, as he understood, with a
second imprisonment there.

You tola Mr. Attorney General that you
understood Mr. 0*Coigly came from Ireland
on account of the state of politics in that
country, and did not think it discreet to go by
his own name? — I did.

Did you know of Mr. O'Connor's belong-
ine to any Etglish society, or connecting him-
self in any respect with English politics^
whilst he was heref — No ; I ^d not know
the least* thing of the kind.

Did he belong to or frequent any society
or club in his lite ?— Not to my knowledge.

Mr. Hugh Bell re-examined by Mr.
Attorney General,

Did Mr. O'Connor mention or not mention
that he was going out of the country with any
persons, and whom ?— ^At the time that he
went into Rent, I understood that Mr.
O'Coigly was to accompany hiroi that he

ISiS] S8 GEORGE HI. Trial qf&Coii^, (fOmnar and olhm [1824

vuhed to do to; and that M^ (yConaor had
Qoosented.

Did Mr. CCoanor infona you whan Mr»
O'Coigly sailed fcom Ireland ? — Hj» never in-
formed roe any thing ahout Mr, 0*Coigly's
arrival from Ireland tul I saw him in my own
bouse.

When was that?— About the middle of
Tebruary.

Had you any conversation afterwards with
Mr* O'Connor as to the time at which Mr.
0*Coigly came from Ireland F — I understood
be had come some very few days before,
two or three days before, aa Mr. O'Connor
told me.

Did Mr. O'Connor, in bis conversation with
joUy tell vou whether Mr. O'Coigly bad come
nom Ireland, or from any oiber country f ^I
understood from Ireland.

No other country was mentioned, was
there? — ^No other country was mentioned*

You have spoken about the exchange at
Hamburgh; do you mean to say that the
ftate .of the exchange with Hamburah was
sucn as to make that an advantageous bargain
you made in February ? — I so understood it.

Do you know what the state of exchange
pas at thattime?^I do not know; but I
could tell if I was at home.

Was it not above thirtv-sevenP— I do not
know precisely the calculation I made of the
interest of moni^.

Has it been at less than thir^«aeven for
the last six months?-^ am not much in the
J^amburgh trade, or conversant with the
Hamburgh exchanee, but the calculation I
9)ade at the time.lcd me to suppose louis d*ors
would be a good remittance.

If the exchange was at tbirty«seven, could
it be a gbod remittance ?— I think it might
for a gentleman ; a traveller, if he takes bills,
be must nec^sarilv have them distounted,
^nd that might not be so convenient

That is your reason then for saving that
lbs remittance appeared to you to be advan-
tageous; now I ask you, upon your credit as
a merchant, do not you know that remittance
h^ bills, when the exchange with Hamburgh
is thirty-seven, is advantageous f— -Valuing
the louis d'or at nineteen shillings^ I do not
know that.

Do you mean to say you do not know that?
p— I do not ; to be sure it would require a lit-
tle operatMNi and working thai I cannot go
Ihrough here.

How long before Mr. Otllonnor left you
was it that the vessel was about to so to

Embden?«-*ljt was early in the month ef Fe-
bnuury.

Do you remember the name of the vessel ?
•— No.-

Do you remember the master of the Tessel ?
i-»No, I do not know that I heard the name
afthevessel; shewae mentisdiedtome by
aniand of mine hi tbo^ilgr.

Waaaot heriianie mentifsne^ nor tfia time
flf beraailmg nwipQedf-.7ha time ^f iwr

sailing was meatmned, and that maiTe it not
necessary for me to inouire the name.

Who was your friena ttat montioaed it ?-^
Mr. Cleggit.

You had been employed to look out ibr
such a vessel? — Mr. 0*Connor had desireil
me to inouire for such a vessel.

Mr. Fiumtr, — I beg to a&k this question ;
did you ever hear any thing from Mr. O'Con*
nor about any paper that he was going to
take with him abroad ; did you know or nesf
of anv paper of any kind whatever? — ^Never,
Did you l^now of any business that be was
going upon with Mr. O'Coigly ?-^No business
whatever.

Did you know of any business they had
together that they were going about ?«-*No
other than to leave the country.*

Mr. O^CfMraoTd— I beg to ask a question i
when Mr. O'Coigly called upon me at your
house, did there appear to be any intimacy
between Mr. OX^igiy and me?— No; Iwn-
derstood you were totally uoarquainled with
him until the time you met in iJondon.

Mr. 0'C(iaaor.«-Did I not tell you it was
but a day or two before that I had ever seen
him?— Yes.

Mr. 0*Coaiior.— Did I not mention to you
that he called upon me as an^rishman in a dis-
tressed situation* and that he had come from
Ireland as a persecuted man ?•- As an Irish-
man that was under that sort of apprehensioa
for his personal safety In Ireland, that made
it necessary for him to come here; yon
did so.
Mr. O'Connor.— Do you think it was in my

power- ■

Mr. Justice Ba/^.-rDo not ask h'un what
he thought, but ask him to facts; you bad
better suggest your questions to your ooonselt
they will put apy question for you.

Mr. 0'C<mnar.-^Have I not told yon that
too many of my countrymen called upon me^
^d I wished to avoid making acquaintance?
—I have h«rd you midce that observation.

Mr. O'Conn^.— Have I often told you that

I was particularly cautious of formma any
new acquaintances in England, especially in
the political line; indeed, that I was deter-
mined not ?— To the best of my recollection
you have made such remarks to roe.

Mr. 0'Connor.^Did I tell you that notbiog
could induce roe to form any sort of connexion
with any political society in Bngland ?«^ do
not recollect these precise words, but I under*
stood from you that you were determined te
be very guarded in your conduct in England,

Mr. CfCo«ttar..^Had you any reason, froos
any thing you heard me say,' to suppose that
Uiero was any sort of intimacv between Mi.
O'Coigly and me, that I should commit my-
self in any danamufi way with Mr. O'Coigly?
—I understood not, but that he van ealirety
a new aoquaintanoe.

Mr. OX^amr. ^Do you betievethat I had
ai^etbev ohtiect in having M^ <yCwg^ with
«IS| Aanmoai a good'oaCond molne ta le-

12S51

Jtrr High Treoion*

lieve a distressed coantrynitii^ from what I
told you in confidence, as a friend ?— No roo-
tive whatever, except the desire you might
liave, from good nature, to assist him.

Mr. O^Connor,'^! will put it stronger. Did
1 not tell you I was averse to it?<^-xes, jou
lav/iented it.

Mr. O'Connor, — Lamented, that I was eriev*
ed I had allowed Mr. CCoigly to go wiu me
out of the country ? — ^Yes.

Mr. O'Connor. — Did I assign any reason
for that? — Yes, you assiened a reason, you
were afi-aid Mr. O'Coigly had been very indis-
creet in mentioning your intention ot going
out of the country.

Mr. Justice Bu/Zfr.— Mr. CyConnor, do not
you see how much this is at the expense of
the other prisoner ?

Mr. Attorney GeneraL-'^e will now read
the letter addressed to Mr. William Williams.

[It was read.]

" Dear Friend ; — I set off to- morrow morn-
ing in a Whitstable hoy, and hope to be at
Vrtiitsteble by night, if the "

„ , wind is fair. I

ihaH take all the parceU you ipeak of with me,
Tour's sincerely, Javes Walus.

*' I get your letters.

«< lonion, S4M Jeft."

Addressed, << Mr. William Wilfiams,
Fountain Inn, St. Margaret-street,
Canterbury.''

Jamee Morrii sworn. — Examined by
Mr. G arrow.

You are a porter to Mr. Bell, I understand?
—Yes.

Do you live at his house in Cbarter-house-
aquare, of at his warehouse in Aldersgate-
street f — At his warehouse.

Do you remember^ on the ?4th of February,
carrying any quantity of lusgaee from Mr.
Bell's bouse to Chester quay l^-Yes.

Were they packages of this sort that are
upon the table?— Yes, deal boxes of this sort.

Were you assisted by another person? —
Yea.

How were they directed ?-«I did not take
ibotiee.

I observe some of these that are upon the
tabte are directed ^ Colonel Morris;'^ did you
observe how any of them were directed ? — I
(fid not take noUce of that.

Can you read ? — Yes.
. Be so good as to look at that direction, and
tell me whether such a direction as that was
upon the packages?— It might, but not to my
Itnowiedge.

Were they ditebted some of them upon
cards like that ?^I tai not eiertain.

Thty-were dfrect^?-^! tm nbt eertttiiii as
to that.

Where Ifaeit diber tanfs or ,p«pers upon
the boxes, itoon which a difMioh was eitW
written or Aigfit M Wrltteof— there might ;
viit St w«a ttm duA of ^the evenhig wh^I
took them.

A. D. 1798. [1988

By whose direction did yoa take Aeiii?.«-
Mr. Bell's servant.

To what place did yoa take them?— To
Chester auay.

To go Dy what conveyance ?— By a hoy ; I
believe the Whitstable hoy.

Did you deliver them at the quay, or to
the people of the hoy?— To the people of
the hoy.

By what directions?— The people in the hoy
took the care of them.

Did you accompany the people to the hoy
next day ?— No.

And you saw nomore of them?— No.

James WdUk 9worn, examined by Mr. Adam,

Do you live with Mr. Bell ?— Yes.

Do you know Mr. CCounor ? — Yes.

Did he visit your master frequently ?— Yes.

Do you remember captain Jones coming
there? — Yes.

Do you see a person at the bar that passed ^
by that name ? — Yes.

Which is captain Jones?— That person
(O'Coigly.)

Do you remember caphun Jones and Mr.
O'Connor dining at your master's house thft
24thof February, theday before Mr. O'Connor
went away ? — Yes.

Did captam Jones go away soon after din*
ner ?— Yes.

Do you remember Mr. O'Connor and Leary
bis servant leaving your master's house early
on the Sunday morning? — ^Yes, I do.

Did you accompany them to the hoy ?-~*
Yes.

Where to ?— Towards the Tower.

Did you go on board the hoy ? — I did, with
them.

Had you gone with the luggage the daybe«
fore ? — No.

You went with them and such packages at
they had on the Sunday morning r—Yes.)

Do you remember any other persons com^
hig on board thie hoy while you were there?
—Yes. .

Where did you first see them ?— In a vessel
in the river.

Whom did you see in that vessel ?— Cap-
tun Jones I knew.

The same person you have pointed out
now? — ^Ycs.

And whom else did you see? — ^^Colonal
Morris.

Do you see him at the bar now ?— Yes (Mr,
(yCdnn&r).

Did they come from on board that vessel to
the hoy ? — ^Yes, in a small boat.

You came on shore again and left the hc^ r
—Yes. ,

Was that the last you saw of them?— Tes»

'Do you kno«r any of the other prisoners at
Hhfe bar?— No.

Did you ever see the person that ails nexk
(Wioiglyr-No.

Dojrdu know how Mr. 0*Connor*s fM^gg^g^
was dimted ?- -No.

1327] 38 GEORGE III. Trial ofO'Coigly, O'Comw and others [1328

James Wallis cross-examined by Mr. Dalloi,

I believe you know that Leary is Mr.
' O'Connor's servant ? — Yes.

You know that he has been so from the
time almost that he was a child?— I cannot
say that.

But as long as you have known Mr. O'Con-
. nor, has Leary been }iis servant ? — Yes.

How long have you known Mr. O'Connor?
— I never knew him till the last time that he
was in England,

Etixabeth Smith sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Abbot,

Where did you live in February last?
— At No. li Plough-court, Mr. Evans's.

You had the first floor at Mr. Evans's house ?
-^Yes, me and my husband.

Do you know either of the prisoners ?—
Yesy Mr. Binns, Mr. Allen^ and captain
Jones.

Where have you seen them ? — In the same
house that I lived in. * .

Which do you mean by captain Jones ?—
This is captain Jones on this side (O'Coigly) :
that is the name I know him by.

Had either of them a lodging in that house?
—Yes, Mr. Allen had.

How long did he lodge there before he went
away ?"-For eleven days, I think.

Had Binns a lodging in that house?— He
occupied his brother's apartments.

Do you recollect the aay that Binns went
away? — ^I do not recollect.

Do you recollect the day that Allen went
away ? — It was on a Saturday evening.

Do you know whether captain Jones was
at that house that evcnine? —He was at that
house in the afterooon ; because he saw me
on the stairs, and spoke to me.

Do you know whether they slept in that
house on that night?— I cannot say, Mr. AU
Jen left my apartment and went up stairs.

Did you see them in the house at bed
time ?— No ; he lefl my apartment, and went
up stairs.

He did not sleep in his own apartment ?—
No.

Do you happen to know who slept in Mr.
Binns's apartment that night ?^- Captain
Jones and Allen.

What] reason have you to suppose that? —
Captain Jones has slept there, and used
sometimes to sleep there with Mr. Binns;
I have seen them go up stairs together to go
to bed.

Did you see captain Jones go up stairs that
night to go to bed ?— No; I saw him in the
alternoon.

Mr. Justice JBuZ/er.— I thoueht you said
just now he went away on Saturday evening ?
— Allen left my apartment on Saturday even-
ine, and went up stairs.

Mr. Justice Ailler.^Why do you suppose
rtiat captwn Jones slept there that night P—
Because he has slept there before wfth Mr.
Bmns ; I have seen him go up stairs to bed.

Mr^Justice Buller.-^D'id he that nighti--I
cannot pretend to say that ; I saw him in ths
house that aflcmoon.

Mr. Abbott. ^Did you hear from him whe-
ther he meaut to sleep there ?— I did not.

Had vou ever seen captain Jones before
last February?- -Yes, about five weeks be-
fore.

What name did he go by then ?— I do not
know ; that was the first time I saw him.

Did he tel) you where he was going then ?
— No.

You do not know what name he went by
when you saw htm first, but when he retuniT
ed, he went by the name of captain Jones :
what dress was he in ? — In blue regimentals.

Was he in regimentals when you first saw
him ? — No.

Can you tell whether any persons went out
of the House early on the Sunday rooming ?
— I do not know; I did not see him any
more.

EUiabeth Smith cross-examined by Mr.

Plumer,

You say you had seen Mr. O'Coigly only
once before and then you did not speak to
him? — ^No.

How long that was before the last time you
had seen him, you do not exactly recollect;
it mi^ht perhaps be two or three months? —
No, about five weeks.

What makes you know it was only five
weeks ? — From my own recollection.

Does anv particular circumstance enable
you to fix the time ? — No.

Did vou understand that he had been to
Ireland in the intermediate time, when he
came back again ?- • Yes.

When did you first see him comeback?
was not it about ten days before he went away
on the Sunday ? — ^It was about ten days before
he last set off.

Elisabeth Smith cross-examined by Mr. Fer-

gusson.

Did Allen occupy an apartment to himself?
—No, all three of them lived in the same
room.

How much did they pay a week for this
room ?— Seven shillines and sixpence.

Have you reason to Know how long Allen
had been in London .^— No ; I only know that
he came to lodge there, and that he lodged
there eleven days.

John Richardson sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.

Garrow,

Did you officiate as a watchman in Floueh-
court, where Evans lives, on Saturday night,
the 34th of February ?— Yes, I did.

Were you desired to call at that bouse at
an early hour in the morning, to call some
persons up ?— I was desired by a man to call
him up at five o'clock in the moming; I
knocked at the door at five o'clddk.

Did you see tlie people that went oat?— I
did not.

fit iSgh Treoion.
by Mr.

ISXSJ

BkhMti SuM iwoAu-*;

Qarnm,

I beliere you are iiMStcr of the Thom&i
aod Stephen hoy from London to Whitstable i
— Ves.

Do you remetbher upon the evening of Sa-
turday theS4th of February, any places being
Engaged in your hoy for the next morning } —
There were some packages came on board
about ten o'clock in the evening of Saturday.

What sort of pacfcagea were they?— Boxes
and things.

W6re uiey like there upon the table ?-—
Yes.

Wereth^ limabertd?«-«Some of them, but
aotall

Did the neit morning any person who is
now here come to your hoyP-^-Yes^ those
four (pointing out Mr. O'Connor, Allen. Leaty,
snd 0'CoigW>

Did they bnn| any package with them in
the morning? — 'ics. "**

Who brought them ?— Mr. (KCoigly brought
some.

What sort of packages were they ?— They
brought some of tnese, some came over nigh^
tome came with them next morning.

Did all these fom persons sail with you ?-^
Yes.

How were the packages directed?— To
colonel Monris.

Had you any eemrerAttion with any of those
persons whilst they were on board the boy f
^-Nothing more than their asking me what

Caces we came by; that waa aU &it passed
stween us.

Did yon pass Orairesend ?— Yes.

Had you any talk about Gmfesend r*-They
asked me li^hecher ihy vessel would be oyct-
hauled at Graveaendf

Which of the sentlemen snd that to you }
•«-They were all together, one of them asked
that question ; I said no, we never were iii
goiiig down, unless there Was some particular
occasion.

What time did you arrive at Whitstable ?-^
About six o'clock.

How were your passengers carried out from
tiie hoy at WfaiUtable?— Mr. O'Connor and
Mr. O'Coigly went in a boat together with
other passengers ; some of the packages were
taken out by them that nicht

Did you carry the little things? — No, I
offered to carry some, but O'Coigly said no,
they would carry them themselves.

When did you land the rest of flie things?
•-^About an hour after.

Where did you take them to ? — ^We carried
them to the inn, and left them there.

Who was there then?— Mr. O'Coigly.

Who paid you ? — He paid mjr master.

Did be pay for all, or only his own share f
^He^Mkidforall.

X>id either of the persona who wore yoUr
pasifengers upon that trip wear a great coall
with a Mack colUirf— i tfiink I can tell the
that wpre that qoit.

VOL. XXVL

A. D. 1798. [lS9d

Who wore that coat ?— The stout genile*^
man^ O'Coigly had that coat on, and he wore
a hairy cap.

A cap of this sort (showing it the witness] ?
— ^Yes, a cap of that sort, and a great coat of
this kind.

You have seen the great coat since thesd
persons were apprehended? — ^Yes.

Did you know it to be the great coat
O'Coigly wore in that trip?— Yes, and I have
two pieces I cut out of it.

Richard Smith cross-examined by
Mr. Dallas.

When did you tikark that great coat?-«^
When I was in London.

How long was that after Mr. O'Coigly wai
on board the hoy ? — I cannot say rightly.

Was not that great coat produced to you by
some person in London, as the great coat
that Mr. OX^oigly had in the hoy?-*-It was
brought to me to say whether it was ?

Was it brought to the house where yotji
were, to ask yon whether that ^as the great
coat Mr. O'Coigly had in the hoy ?— Yes.

Waa it produced to you singly, or with any
other great coats? — It was in the room i^hen
I went in.

You never saw him before the day when he
was on board the hoy ?— No, not to mj
knowledge.

And you saw him at Whitstable thb next
day?— Yes.

At what o'clock did Mr. O'Coigly dome on
boardtheboy?-<*-Betweeri j4X ami^ven; h6
and Mr. O'Connor came together, or nearly
at the same time, I did not observe it par-
ticularly, it was as near as can be at the samd
time.

Were you present when the baggage was
searched at whitstable ?«— I was in the room.

The boxes were broke open and searched
there?— Th(9 i^re opened and searched
there.

By whom ?— By the king's officer there, llf r.
King.

How long was this after th^y arrived at
Whitstable ?— That was on the Monday night ;
we cot there on the Sunday night

What place in London was it where you
saw this great coat in the room, and pilchea
upon it as the one Mr. O'Ooigly had worn?—
The Secreury of state'ft office.

As soon as you saw it, did yott fix u])Oii
that as the one he wofe ?--Yes, and told th«
gentlemen there so:

Hov^ ybuany donbinow about it? — tdd
not think I have.

The eenllemaai aske^S yoU how soon it waa
after yon had seen tbtese persons at Whit*
atable; can you tell how soon it was?-«I
cannot tell, it was within three or four days^

$le;phen Jf f ritiii awom.— ^samtned
by Mr. Adam.

I believe ybu tofittp m Beftr and Key ii
WliitsMMNi:¥e«i • . •. ^

13312 3B GEORGE III. Trial of 0' Coigly, O* Cannon and othm [ 1 332

Do you remember oa Sunday the 95th of
February last, any of the persons you see at
the bar, coming to your house ? — Yes.

Which of them ?---One was called colonel
Morris, and the other captain Jones, but I do
not know which was called which, the two
others passed as servants.

About what time of day did they arrive ?—
About four in tlie afternoon.

Did they dine there ?— Yes.

Did they stay all night ?— Yes.

How were they accommodated as to beds ?
The two gentlemen slept in a two bedded
room, the two servants slept in one single
bed in a room, over my tap room.

Mr. O'Coigly and Mr. O'Connor slept in a
two bedded room N- 1 do not know what
their names are, but' one passed for captain
Jones, the other for colonel Morris.

Did they aU breakfiut at your house the
next morning f — ^No, I went out before they
were stirring, and one of the gentlemen went
out of the door, and went up street from the
house, the other gentleman stopped, as I
understood from my wife, and breakfasted.

You must not mention what you understood
from any body elseF-^I did not see him
breakfast.

How do ^ou know that one was called
colonel Morris, and tbe other captain Jones ?
7~I heai^ the company in the tap room speak
it from their servants.

Was their baggage brought on shore that
night, or the next morning ? — ^The bagj^age
brought that night was two or three small
boxes.

Was any baggage brought next morning?

—No.

Did Mr. O'Connor and O'Coigly breakfast
next morning? — No, Mr. O'Connor went up
the street, and I never saw him at all that
morning, nor never apin.

Mr. O'Coiffly remained during the greater
part of that day ?— Yes, all the Monday.

Was the baggage brought on shore on Mon*
day ?— Yes, in the evening.

Did they propose to go from thence to any
other place ? — when the baesage was brought
on shore, that gentleman, Mr. OCoigly, told
me he had agreed for a young fellow to carry
him to Margate in his boat, and he disap-
pointed him, and told him he could not carry
him that night, pnd would cany him next
morning, and he asked me if I could accom-
modate him with a boat to carry him to
Margate, I told him I would do the best I
coula, I called a youne fellow in, that was in
the tap room, Edwara Ward, and asked him
if he could take the gentleman, and his
ba{;gage, down to Margate ; he asked him a
gumea and a half, Mr. O'Coigly did not like
togiveit^

uid O'Coigly make any enouiry about the
baseage betne searched at the Uunora-house ?
— ^When thebasgage was brouzht on shore,
if, was searched 1^ the ](ingf s officer ; after it
was searebed the^ all vi^t out of the room,

and Mr. O'Coigly asked me whether there
was an}r' danger of being searched at Margate,
I told him yes, I dared say there was bv the
searching officer; I said I fancv I can tell you
the reason that you was searched here - he
asked me the reason, I said, did not you ask the
hoy men whether there was any danger of being
searched at Gravesend, he said yes; I ssid
that is the reason then that you was aeaicbed
here by the information of the hoymen.

What time . did they leave your house next
day? — ^In the morning.

How. was the baggage carried?-— By a
cart.

Whose cart ? — One Thomsett's cart.

Did Thomsett accompany the cart? — He
went with the cart himself from my bouse.

Who went along with the cart? — The two
servants, Allen and Leary, and O'Coigly.

Was all the baggage put in the cart f — ^Yes.

They set off from your house to go to Bfar-
gale ? — Yes.

Had ycm any conversation with O'Coigly
about going to Dover? — I went in after tmy
had done searching * I said it is a very dis-
agreeable piece ofbusiness to have a person's
goods torn about in that manner ; I said this
to O'Coigly, he made answer to me it was; I
asked him whether he wanted to go on the
other side of the water, he made me answer
no he did not ; I asked him whether be had
any correspondents at the other side of tbe
water, he told me he had acquaintance at
Amsterdam ; I made answer asain thati was
going to Dover, and if I could oe of any ser-
vice taking a line for him I would take one
with me, as there were neutral vessels lying
in Dover harbouTi

Did he give you a letter? — He said he
should be much obliged to me, and he g^ve
me a letter; this is the letter he gave me.

Did you go to Dover?— Yes, I cankd the
letter to Dover.

How came you to have the letter now?— I
said, if there is no convoy from Dover, where
shall I direct this letter to you again ; the
answer he made me was, it was of no conse-
quence.

Were you present when the agreement was
made with Thomsett for the cart? — I was;
a guinea was the money agreed upon, I
think.

[The Letter read.]

Whitstable, February 36, 1T98.
^ Dear Sir ; Happening by accident to be
here, and [hearing of a general embargo laid
on all vessels in the Dutfa ports, and a seixttre
of our merchandize there, I wish to be in-
formed exactly by you, the more so as I am
obliged to attend my duty as a military man at
present, and my partner has a qnanii^ of
goodi,juit ready to ship, and consigned to yam,
Tliis will be sent over by a carefiu hand, and
the- sooner you answer, it the bettM* for both
parties; bemuse, if yo«ir answer «iieuld*lw
favourable, we shall M^p perhapsi i

1

ISSS]

Jhr High Treason*

A. D. 1798.

[ISS4

Straet

qutntity. Direct, in all haste, to Parkin&on
and Co. High-«treet, Manchester. We are
▼ery uneasy about tlie safety of the last parcel
we sent over. Lose no time, I pray vou. In
the mean whfle lam, Your's sincerely,

•* Edwarp Wallace."

Addressed to '* Mynheer Van 8olonu)n9
Van Hacolem, Amsterdam.*'

Stephen Perkins^ cross-examined by Mr.

Plumer,

What pari of the day was it when the lug-
gag? was searched by King? — On Monday
evening.

There was Mr. Smith, and the revenue- of-
ficer, Mr. King, and another person ? — Tlie
people belonging to the hoy came ashore with
them.

They were sometime searching them? —
They were some time; there were several
people standing at the door to see them
searched, I did not.

This Kin^, and the other men, expected to
find somethmg, they had ordered a buwl of

funch at your house ? — ^That I do not know ;
did not send for ihem.

You told Mr. O'Coigly the reason why he
was searched, and that he might expect to be
searched again at Margate ? — Yes, there is no
goods go on shore, from the quay at Margate,
without being searched.

You said both these gentlemen slept in the
same room ; you had but one room, I believe,
to accommodate them with ? — There were two
beds in one room.

You had no other room to sleep them in ?
— "So ; they asked for two rooms I think, but
I had no other beds fit for any gentlemen to
sleep in.

JohH Dyason sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Garrow,

You are nephew, I understand, and servant
to Mr. Perkins, who has just been examined ?
—Yes.

Did you sleep in the next room to the two-
bedded room, on the night the gentlemen
slept there ?^Yes.

Did you see the gentlemen before they
went to bed? — 'So.

Did you hear any thing passing in that two
bedded room in the course of the night? — In
the momine, before I got up, I did.

What did you hear passing?— They passed
and re-passra my door, and I heard some
money told in the two-bedded room.
- From the length of time that it was count-
ing, did it appear to be a prettv large quan-
tity ? — It was some considerable sum, I can*
not tell the quantity.

Did you hear auy expressions whilst they
were counting the money ? — ^Yes, I heard them
read writing, I cannot tell what ; I beard a
pen go ; I heard there was somebody in the
room writing: I heard one say to the other,
that it was wrong, tliey must write some-
thing else, but I c^d not tell what.

John Dyaton cross-examined by Mr. Dallas.

You are a waiter in this house ; did you lis-
ten at the door ? — So.

I hope you did not : Do you mean' to swear,
that without listening; at the door you heard a
pen go ; look at the lury, and tell them that,
upon your oath ; without listening at the door,
do you mean to tell the jury that you heard a
pen go? — Yes.

Mr. Gorrcw.— What is the partition consti-
tttted of between the two rooms ? — ^The par-
tition between the two rooms is wainscot, part
of the way up, and then above it an open lat-
tice work.

Therefore, without getting up to listen, you
heard it? — ^Yes, I heard it as I lay upon my
bed.

Mr. Garrow. — ^I will just call Mr. Perkins
back, to hear whether what this witness re-
presents of the lattice- work is true.

Stephen P£rX:tiif called again.

What is the partition between the room in
which Dyason slept, and the room in which
these two men slept?— Lath and plaister;
there is a passage goes by this young fellow's*
room with a thin partition, and the head of
his bed comes agamst the head of one of the
beds in the other room.

Is the lath and plaister a close paiHtion up
to the top ?— Yes, it is up to the top in that
part, but It is open in the passage-way to the
door, for about sixteen inches ; it is an open
railing above the pannel.

Is there any thing there to prevent the*
sound being heard from one room to the other ?
— No ; if you lay in that room, you can hear
any tody moving in the other room.

John Kingy esq. sworn. — Examined by Mr.

Garrow.

You are under-secretarv of state to his
grace the duke of Portland ? — Yes.

Were you present when this mahogany
money-chest was broken open at the Secre«
tary of state's office ? — Yes.

Did it require considerable force to break
it open?-— It did.

Did you, upon its beine broken open, exa*
mine its couteuts ?— I did.

Has it been sealed up since ?-^Yes, with
the ioint seal of Mr. Ford and myself; this is
my liand-writine upon it.

Mr. Justice &^rv— You may open it*

[Mr. King broke tlie seal.]

Mr. Garrov.-— What does it contain? —
Louis-d'ors, double louis-d'ors, and guineiu,
and I think one or two half'Suineas.

To what amount in the vfbole f — I believe
something more than a thousand pound.

All in specie ? — All in gold.

What proportion does the foreign money
bear to the other P-—I have a little memoran-
dum I put in my pocket ; the great bulk is, I
think, in double and single iouis-d'ors ; this

1935] 38 GEORGE lU. Trial ofO'Co^ly, ffConfwr and othen [ISSQ

bit of paper wi^ in ti bas with mon^y, and
there was a little bit of string; whether the
string u now in it I do not know, but it tied
this paper to the money, which was rolled up
in brown paper.

. A ticket to something like a rolleau ?— Yes,
this is the bit of paper, and this bit of paper
was in the bag too, with marks of a sum of
money, which accorded with the bit of paper,
** 97 guineas" ; the ticket is " C^tain Jones."
Mr, Garraw, — Your lordship will observe
there b something on this paper scratched
out with a pen, which is perfectly illegible,
and there is wrote " 97 guineas.^ Did you
find any thing else ?— Nothing but these rol*
leausiinorder to count them we opened all
but three, those three are )ell in the state in
which they were. J must observe, that the
^hite paper in which we wrapped them up, is
pot the paper they were originally wn^^ped up

m.

Did all the papers contain an equal num-
ber f-^-The rolleaus, in general, contained
^ixty louis-d'ors, and of double louis-d'ors
about forty; there were four little ivory cvlin-
ders taken out of a small dressins-boi, which
also held guineas; Mr. Ford and I counted
them out of this box, and we marked them.
This paper was taken out of the dretsing-boi,
I marked it at the time» it was then in the
8ame state as it is now. [The paper was torn
in several places.]

[It was read.]

" ommunicate write by
** Mr. William Williams, at the Fountain Inn,
** 8t. MargaretVstreet, Canterbury, where I
'* shall receive it to-morrow morning about
** o'clock. I have seen the person I

** expected, and procured two
** which he assures va»"

On ih4 other side is written^

** nature, and what was their business
** every person having answered those ques-
•• tions, he was not particular or urgent upon
** any farther enquiries. Mr. Cornwall is
** employed by the p. of Portland, and was
•* preceeded in his employment by a pers
* from the office of the Sec^y. I have
" made"

Mr. G4irrow.— What we read it for is the
direction, « Mr. WiUiam WiUiams, at the
FouqUm Inn^ St. Margaret's-street, Canter-
bury."

John King, esq. cross-examined by Mr.

Flumer.

From.whom did you receive the box to Ibe
contents of which you haire been speaking ?—
The box, vyith the mQUta, I reoeived taook
Mr. Fold.

When f ^1 should suppeee about the €th
Of the 7th of March; it has Imcd in my poe-
session ever since, under the joiot aeals of
Mr. Ford and myself.

Do you know whereii c^m9 from when it
was brought to you ?— It was brought W me
from Mr. Ford's roon, which iso?er tiie offioa
rooms.

Had you seen it in the room f-'^I SMvMr.
Ford put it in a place be has in that room,
and I received it from Mr. Ford.

Is there any other box you have spoken to
but that ? — Yes, a dressing-box.

Did you ^so receive that from Mr. Fofd ?
— ^That was taken out at the time they were
broken open in my presence.

Who had the other when it was opened^
—It was delivered into the custody of Mr.
Foni.

Who delivered it into his custody f •>— The
messenger; I believe he was in the mom
when it was opened.

I understand they were both opened, and
the contents of ope bpx was put into tlbfi
other? — Yes.

You have told us one box yoi|1iad from Mr.
Ford ; do you know where the other caeie
from?— They were both in the possession of
Mr. Ford.

Mr. Garrow. — ^They were both in Mr.
Ford's room in the Secretary of state*s office f
—Yes.

They were both broken open in your pre-
sence f — Yes.

And the money- chest delivered over to
your keeping? — Yes.

And tne other was put into Mr. Ford's
keeping ? — Yes.

Richard Ford, esq. sworn. — ^Examined by

Mr. Garrow,

We have understood that you were nreseat
when this small money-chest was orokcn
open at the Secretary of state's office? — I was.

Did you and Mr. King put your respective
seals upon it ? — Yes ; first of aU we marked it.

How did you become possessed of this small
chest ?— I received it from Fugion and Revett^
in Bow- street.

It continue in your office, unopeaed, tiU
it was broken open in the presence of Mr.
King and you ? — I ordered Uiera to keep the
box, and to bring it when I had them ta le-
examine; I did not break it open at thai
time ; they were ordered, the next day. to the
Secretary of staters office, and there the box
was broken open in my presenoe.

There is a dreaiing-box likeviaey in a bhck
leHhercase; did you see that brHBUi open f
— Yes,Idid.

9y whom was that producad ?-^It was pro-
duced at Bow-sireet by Fugkiu and Revett,
and kept by them till the next day» when
they brought it to the Secwlaiy « alaieVi
office.

I understand it has been in your coslD^y
ever since ?-^It has.

•

"Rkk^rd Fordi esq. cross-exaouped Vy
These baies were biwiglu bjp Wvfjmm mid

IS8T]

JhrlBgk IWoMiti

BflMlltoBttfrslMel; what bocaoM of tbam
after thejr wan luougtit thane frVTb^ wara
]|(»|QfiaMdinBow«alnait tha piiaoDars ware
committed; I knew they would be re^sa*
Quoad, tharefara I kapl iha bo^tas uoopaned ;
the auitar wae than aofuaunicatad to UtiB
Seorstanr of atata, who had been appriaad
of it banire; ha ordend tham to ba brought
to his oSeSf and there the boiOB ware brokao
open.

In whose outtody did they oonlinua ?-— In
the officer's custody, locked ii|i in o f^mn at
^oir*stceet

mcb^d Ford, esq. cross-examined by
Mr. uwrne^.

The prisonefs were brought bafon you im-
asedialalpr upon tbdi anriaal to town, prior to
their bemg taken to the Saciataiy ot staters
office ?T-*Yas.

. Mr, Bions, when he waa brao^t bafiora
you, acknowledged immadiatdy that hia aama
VM iohn Binns?— Ha did.

Rldiard Ford, esq. cro98-examined by
Mr. Fergus9(m.

Do JMH racoilaet aay money baiM atfited
by the oficers to be iound upon Auen f*^l
ilo not recollect it.

Mr. PlwotfTw-^Mr. Ot]onnor told yon his
name immediately? — I asked him what his
Otoia was, be said h» namo waa O'Connor.

DH Allan give you his nameP^He did;
and lao said, what ho had done was by his
master's cmlera.

Mr. Garraw. — You have been asked who*
thar Mr. Bimis, unon being asked his name,
did not immediately tell you his name, and
whether Mr. O'Connor did not also tell you
hia name; I underatand they both did ; did
you ask any of the prisoners whether they
were acfltiainled or connected wi^ each other?

Mr. P/tcsier.— Were the partieuiars of their
examination taken down in writing?

Wknemr^Tht particulars of the prisoner
OX]oigly'a ciamination were taken down in
writing by myself, which I have got.

Mr. OV>ottfior's woit not? — No, Mr.
O^Comyv deelinod aosweriog any qoaatkNis.

Edward Fuglon called again. — Examined by

Mr, QarvQb).

«

Among the arUcles you secured and broutht
up to London, was thi| aaudl heavy d&st
QOof>«^Itwas.

Did you keep that in yaur possession till
ynugot to Boia-atreetl-*Yea.

mcae did you take it neat dayf^ToIko
SecretaFf of stated office.

Did yao take it there in the Baasa itale In
whioh you found it at Margate ?— rVea.

Did you deliver it in precisely the same
slate a{ Mr. Ford's office!.*-! did.

Is this dressing-box one of the artklas you
bfooght op in the aaioa oiannerfr^It ia.

0id you taisathaAlikowisetoiiow-ttreet?

A. D. 17M. [1SS8

During tiiot night, whilH it femainad in
Bow*street, in whose custody was it ?'-?iXiQc|cad i
op in pi din'mg^saonif of which I had the key ;
it was carried unopened to theSfioiatary of
state's office the next day.

Were you present wbefi the boxes were
opened ? — I was only present when the little
box was opened.

Wts it opened with considorable difficuky f
—There was a smith sent for to open it.

John Kcveft called sgw.— -Examine^ by
Mr. (jarrow^

Did you assist in bringing this small cheat
to London, and the dressm^bos ?^Yes.

Did you keep them at Bow«street thai
ni^t, in the same stale in which you iMUid
them at Mamie ?-*-Just so.

Were th<^lockad up ^eie thai night in jjio
same stater— They were; I took Ihem the
next morning, in the same state, to the Secre-
tary of staled office.

Had^hey been opened, from the time yaw
liMiod.tham M Margate, till they sieee opened
by force at the Secretary of st^s oooef*-*
They had not.

Jonas King 9 wom*— Examined by J(r» 4d<^Ph

You are coast* waiter at Wbitstable I— Yes.

Do you know any of the prisoners l«— I ha^
9een them all be6M«.

Do you know Mr. OXSonaor, O^Coifly,
Allen ond Leary ?-^I saw them at Maraate.

Did you see the other prisonar at Whit-
stable, on the 96th of February f— Yes; (
did not see Mr. O'Connor there.

Do you reroembery on Monday the S6th
of February last, some baggage bemg brought
from on board the hoy, to the Bear and Key f
—Yes,

Did you examine it? — ^Yes^ I examined the
whole, excepting two mahogany packages.

What waa ypur mason for not examining
them^ — I conceived there were no smuggl^
goods in them from their smallnesa; ^i if
Qiere were any treasonable papers, or any
thing of that sort, I knew my authority was
not sufficient to detain it.

Did any ihtnj; pass brtween 3K>u and Leary
upon that subject? — ^Mr. O'Coigly told me
they were colonel Morris's pack»gf9^ and ho
had the keys; fmd tbey were his servant^
which was the reason wny he did not choose
to have them opened. •

The others you opened and examined f—-
Yes, I did.

Did they say where colonel Morris was
goinj to?'^Thoy told me he was g<Mtig to
the East Indies. »

The pereen to whom these two boxes be-
lonndf— T^ey said the w4iole belonced to
colonol Morris, and part wei^ marked with
his name; that he was gein^ to the IBaat
Indies, and he had the keys, which yr$fi the
reason why they did- not proooce thepa.

Did yon 9ee Binna afUffwardS; ^ apy timef
«^Yesy U Margate. ^

1SS9] S8 GEORGE UI. Trial of O'Caigfy, VCammond aihert [ 1310

Do >[ou remember any thine that passed
respecting Binns at Mat^te ?— 3 told him be
was the man that had bMn with the people
at Whitstable to hire a boat, as he answered
the description they had given me of him.

Did he say any thing upon that occasion ?
-—No, he did not say a vfora.

Had he sud any filing before that l-^l be-
lieve he sud something that he seemed sur-
prised that I should say he had ever been at
Whitstable : I told him I thoueht he was the
person that had been with the Whitstable
people to get a boat to convey some persons
to France.

You did not see Binns till he was appre-
hended f— No.

Mr. Dal^.— Nothing passed between you
and Leary?— Not that I recollect.

Tkomat Hocklat sworn. — Examined by Mr.

AbboU.

r

Are you part owner of the Whitstable hoy ?
—Yes.

Do you know either of the prisoners ?— I
know O^Coigly.

Upon what occasion did vou see him ?— I
went to receive the freight nom him on Mon-
day evening, the 96th of February.

]N>r how many did you receive freight ?— I
put down in the bill six parcels and four pas-
senjgerSy but there were seven, and four boxes,
which made eleven.

Did he pay you ?— Ue paid me one suinea.

Did you give him a n.*ceipt for it f— I did.

Mr. Attorney Genera/.— Is this the bill ?—
YeSy it is.

[It was read.]

"< Col. Morris,

" To Salisbury and Co.
•Mr98. f. d.

^ S5 Feb'. <' To 4 Passengers 10 0

** To freight of 6 parsel of

badage #.••••••• n o

^.1 1 0

« Rec* the Conf,

" For Salisbury and ^If,

<< Tho^ Hockless/*

Htnry Tkomiett sworn. — ^Examined by Mr.
Attorney OeneraL

Where do you live? — ^Ai Offham, in this
county.

What is your eroplovment ? — ^A labourer.

Do you remember being at the Bear and
Eev, at WhitsUble, on Monday, the S6th of
February last ?— Yes.

Upon what occasion did yougo thereN-I
only went there knowing the people there.

Did you see any of the prisoners at the bar
there that night ?^Yes, there were some
gentlemen there.

Had you any conversation with those gen-
tlemen about taking any baggage to any
place?— I was in Mr. PcridSs tap-ropm.

where the two servants sat. one of captmn
Jones's, and the other colonel Morris's.

Do you know the names of the servants f
—No.

Had vou any conversation with them about
taking bamge any where? — ^The waterman
came in and said he would not take theth
under a guinea and a half; I offered to take
them for a guinea ; the servant immediately
asked me to go into the parlour to captain
Jones ; I went in and agreed to take them for
him for a guinea.

Do you know captain Jones agun ?— Yes,
that is him (0*Coigly).

Did you see colonel Morris at Whitstable,
on Monday morning ?— Yes.

Did you see them land ? — ^Ycs, I was there
when they came on shore ftom the hoy, on
Sunday afternoon.

You did not see colonel Morris when yon
went to agree about taking the baggage ?•—
He was not there then.

Had you any talk about colonel Morns
with captain Jones, when agreeing with htei
about the baggage r— Not a word.

Did captain Jones, or either of the servants,
tell you where colonel Morris was gone to, or
where you were to meet them f — ^I was to
meet them at Margate.

Whom did you make that bargain with ?—
With captain Jones.

Had you any conversation with oolooel
Morris's servant about where his master was

going to ?-— None in particular ; I did not ask
im any questions ; m travelling he put that
conversation to me, he said he was going to
meet colonel Morris at Margate, with another
gentleman coming from Dover.

In the conversation that passed, was it
stated to you where colonel Morris was going
to ?— Captain Jones said he should return to
London again, as colonel Morris and his ser-
vant were going to the West Indies.

You are sure of that ? — ^Yes.

What time did you set out from Whit-
stable?— A quarter before seven in the
momine.

At what time did you arrive at Margate ? —
About four in the afternoon ; we stopped od
the road to breakfast, at Mrs. Raddons, at m
place called Sarr.

Was that on the Tuesday ? — Tuesday
morning.

Did captain Jones go with you?— He and
the two servants walked along- side the cart alt
the way ; we got to Margate about four.

Had you any other conversation with the
captain, in your wa yfrom Whitstable to Mar-
gate f— After we left Sarr, captain Jones
asked me what business I was ; I told him I
was a trader, and lived about forty miiea fron
the place where I was then. I told him the
people at Whitstable were all in a boggle
about him.

What did you mean by that expression?^-

AU in confusion to know where he was goings

Ihat they were in a mbtrust about hiaa, about

Jot High Treason.

mn

where he was going ; he said he was going
to meet colonel Morns and the gentleman
from pOFer; he said he had been at sea him-
self, that he had sailed in the Morgan Rattler^
the last American disturbance, as captain.

Do you recollect what sort of bag^ge it
was you took in your cart ?— Yes, fhu is some
of the luggage.

Do you recollect any thing in particalar ? —
Yes, that box captain Jones told me to take
g[reat care of particularly, and a coat that was
tied up ; when we brrakfasted, he ordered
me to take the coat out of the cart into the
parlour: I gave it to iht person that stands
behind him, that acted as ms servant, he took
it in the parlour.

Should you know the coat again if you saw
it? — ^It was something like one of these coats;
it was tied up with a tea chest in it. After
we had been at Margate about three minutes,
colonel Morris came, with the other gentle-
man ; he called for a private room.

Was that the same person you had seen
come from the Whitstable hoy, on the Sun-
day ?— Yes, with a drab-coloured frock coat
on, with another gentleman with him : they
went up stairs immediately: I said to the
servant, that is colonel Morris; by Jasus,
said he, I don't know.

Which of the servants said that ?— ^Allen.

Were you paid for this job ?— Yes i captain
Jones gave me a guinea. After the barber
bad dressed his hair, he went up stairs to
colonel Morris.

Mr. Justice Lawrenee.'^'Do you know the
person that was with colonel Morris?—! did
not take notice of his face as he came in.

Henry Thomelt cross-examined by Mr.

DalUu,

You told eaptain Jones, on the .way to
Margate, that the people at Whitstable were
in a state of distrust about him?— I dkl.
When be save me the guinea, he said, the
people at Whitstable are nothing to you ; they
are m a boggle, keep them so.

Do you know a woman of the name of
Sarah Jones?-— Yes, she is a sister of mine.

Have you ever had any conversation with
her about the evidence you intended to give
upon the trial of this indictment ?-~-Nothing
of any consequence.

As to the consequence you will suffer us to
judse: state what the converaatiovWas you
had with her upon the evidence you intended
to give upon this indictment ?-^he sent to
me when 1 .was at Canterburv, to ask me
about this business ; she said it would be
better for me if I did not come forwa^, she
thought I might have some money there ; I
denied her, and went out of the house imme-
diately.. She said Mrs. Peck, the physician's
wife^ at Canterbury, was Mr. O'Connor's first
cousin.

Upon your oath, and mind what answer
you give, you never declared to her that vou
would hang all these persons ?<?«'I said if they

A. D. 1798.

[JS42

deserved it, let them be hung ; I stick to my
stuff now ; I will never deny one word.

Upon your oath, have you not declared to
her positively that vou would hang all these,
persons ? — I will take an oath I have not said
any such thing.

Have you ever talked to her about the ex-
pectation you had of a reward afler this trial
should be over ?— Never, I was not with her
a minute.

And you never said, I take for granted, that
if they had a hundred lives, you would take
them all ? — ^No.

Do you know Cornelius Kettle f — Yes, he
lives at Off ham.

Have you never told him that you were to
have a reward aAer this trial was over ? — ^No.

You never told him that you were to have
a hundred pound for the job ? — No.

Nor saia any thing to that effect? — I
said I would not take a hundred pound : my
meanine is bribery, that I would not take a
hundrea guineas.

Upon your oath did you add the words^ from
any of Mr. O'Connor's friends? — ^No; it was
only his conversation to me, that I refused it
because I have had it put to roe : since that
I have had three hundred pound offered me.

Do you mean to say that the substance of
your conversation to him, was, that you would
not take a hundred guineas from any friend'
of Mr. OX^onnor's ; or that you would not
take a hundred guineas for the reward you
were to have for the evidence you were to
give ?— There was nothing of Mr. O'Connor
mentioned.

But something of a hundred euineas was
mentioned? — He might say, Harr^ would
you take a hundred guineas, and I might re-
fuse it.

But upon yoor oath, did he say so ? — ^I can-
not swear any such thing.

Upon your oath, what did you yourself say
as to this hundred guineas?-— There was no
hundred guineas.

You said so iust now ? — I said I would not
take a hundred pound.

What did you say about the hundred
pound? — ^I said I would not take a hundred
pound.

For what?— For bribery.

Do you mean to swear that is what you
said to Mr. Kettle ? — It was my meanine.

I ask you what you said ; jrou will not
Swear you added the words for bnbery ?— That
is my meaning, that I would not take a hun-
dred pound, ifany body ofiered me.

Did you make use of the word, that you
would net take a hundred pound for bribery P
— ^There was no such thing as a boMred-
pound mentioned.

Do you know a woman of the name of
Mary Morgan ? — No.

Was there any woman present at the time
you had this converssCtion with Mrs. Jones?—
There was some charwoman in her room
there.

§

1843] 98 GEOROB IIL Trial ojaC^A^, xyCtmn^ and othm [1344

Do yt» wtotoifccr» upon Ibe wn/laag of
Sunday tfat ttth of Febnttryi toy peraM il
the Imr oonmig lo jour bowe^^'Vei, Mr.
Bidtts eame to wkf hcimt.

In ooflapanj with whom ?--*A perlDB vf tha
nima of Mahonay*

How did he cotne to GantatboryP^-Ht
came on horseback.

Wblit application waa made to you with re>
spect to tl)ia gentleman?— MahoB^y asked
me if I could accommodate that gentkann
with abed, and take cate of hit hone, I told
him I would doil; ha begged me to put op
his horse, then Mahoney and he frentioto
the bar, mad had soma beer there.

Did the prisoner make any appficationto
yoirfto senaio any other inn for him?— He
desired me to send to the Fountain iop for
a letter or parcel directed for Mr. WilliMSr
and gave me a shilling to pay for it.

Was his ^ame mentioned to you in soy
other way than desiring you to inquirt for s
parcel fot Mr. Williams ?— Not at that tjae;
I sent, but there was nothing ; one of mem
said it mfeht be at the post^iffice, I behcve
Mahoney, but am not certain, said that, opon
which MaboiKy said he wouM go aad lee ; bt
'**nt, ^^

Did the prisoner say any tbiig to ^oo, vm
Mahoney #as gone, whh* respett la the joor-
ney he had Uken thai day ?--He isid be «tf
▼ery much fttigiled witb his jouraey, tho^^
came from.Lomon to Gravesend in ^^
and from tbence to Canterbury on hortebitf)
and waaferymocii fatigued; be aAed ine
irhen I thought the WhitsUUe hoyiMvU
be in, I told Iwn I thoogbc that eveaiog.

Wm this while Mahoney was gone ?-Ycf ;

Mahoney returned with a IcUet or two, wbico

he gave to Mr. Binns. . .

I atippoo^ you did not aeethedUeeUoeioi

those letters?^-! did not ,

Waa it, or them, opened by the fm»tTf
— i dm not certain whether one or two were
brought ; I saw him open one, then stnoe
conversation took alacfe &liout the WfaltStaMO

Bthry Tham$€ti re-examined by Mr. Auorney

Oenetal,

You dropped tn expression thai you had
had three hundred poood offered you ; pray
who offered you that three hundred pound ?
— I had a brother that wa$ sent from New-
^te^ a prisoner that is in there, that offered
It me.

What did he offer it you for ? — ^To go away,
and not come against these people.

In point of tet, your brotner came to you
and offered you three hundred poudd ; how
do vou know he was sent fiom New^e?*—
By his word.

That is all yotf know of H ?^Yes.

You refused that three hundred pound
which was so offered you?*-* Yet.

David AttHtr swofn.— Sxamined by Mr.

Adam,

You are a stone-mason at Gtavesend?-—
Yes.

Do you reorilecL upon Slinday, the ftSth of
February^ either of the persons now at the
bar coming to your house at Gravesend ?—
The raidflle one, Binns, cAme to my house.

What did he say to you ?^He mentioned
a name in London that I knew, Galloway.

Who is he?-«He is something in the iron
work by profession.

Where had you known Galloway ?-^I had
known him three or four yeafs back In
London.

You midefirtand my ouostioB; in what
character and capacity aid you know Mr.
GaUow^ f-^Aa il metnber of th^ Correspond-
ing Society ; he astntibned GadloWa|y'a iMune,
and said be wtoted n horse.

Did he give any name as his own name ?•«*
He said bis name wfcs Williama.

What did he say about Galloway ?«-*He
only mentioned Gidlow^s ilane»

As how?— He mentioned hia dame from
my knowing Galloway three or fcMdr years
book. I reootnmetiddd him to a horse, that
was what he asked.

Did he tell you where he came from P«~He
s^d ffott London; th«t ho hUd colne down
by the Gravesend l>oat.

Where did he sayhd Waa going lo?--To
Canterbory or Whitstable.

Did you procure htm a horse ?--*I reeom*
mended hios to a horse*

Did he niine both pkeeo^ did he say^that
he wns going to Canterbuiy pr WhitataUef
—Yes.

Did you ^cwany thing more tf him till he
was taken taio custbdy P'^I neter aaiW hhw
fkoqft Ibift time till I aaw him in custody.

You are sure he is the perion ?-**Ianii
• Yoit^ did Hot know hia real name N^-No^ I
did not.

tfithbfai ttok^ fcWfitti.— ftxamified %
Mr. Gdtrow.

You keep the Sua Inn, at Canterbury ?-..

1 C9.

conversation took place about the
hoy between Mahoney and Mr. Binat.

About its arrival ?— Yes : Mahoney esW
the prisoner then what he the piisooer in-
tended to do with himself that ettoing;
Binns said he had some thoughts of gowg
to Whitstable ; Mahoney advised l^»^ '^^
and 00 in the morning, and be woiad^^
aoraeSod/to spend the evening with tbeio;
I then ottered them another room, M *°^
w«nt out and soon after returned, and Uu«^
persona more. Who spent the eVeniag vnui

Who were thqr?-Claris, a boo^wl^^
Stirrup, a man that Uvea in Canterbury, va
another person that I did not know.

About wh^t time did the prisoner Btons
retire to mt?--Aboutrievetto'idocfe.

When did you see him again?— TbeWed*
nuadsy ftdlbwmg. i^

Yoitiiem saw him till ha tras in cmw
Kgainyl hBli^e?-*»No; and tfann l^^
at Canterbury at the KiogTi-head.

13452

f&r High Treosan*

A. D. ms.

[lSi6

you ^ into the rooyn -where he was^
dkl ; I went iif» to him and \M him (
ImmI htd the Bleasure of seeing him before^
buC'iie detiiedT knowing me, and ordered me
out of- the room.

Repeat his expression when he denied
kiKKving youy and ordered you out of the
ixKKu f — lie said he knew nothing of me, ami
%ntli a deal of haughtiness ordered me out of
the room.

That induces me to ask you whether you
iLre sure that this is the person who was at
ymir house upon the Sunday evening before,
and with whom you had all this conversa^
tion ? — I am.

Have you any, the least doubt in the world
of it f— No.

Maty Lemon sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Garrow.

You were a servant to Mr. Cloke, at the
Son at Canterbury ?---Ye8.

Do you remember upon a Sunday night
any person whom you now see in court sleep*
ine at your master's house ?-^Yes.

Whkh is the person ?--Tbat many Bimn,
[foiniing to Mr. O^ConiiM*].

How soon after he came to your house did

Son see him F— -Till about ten o'clock, when
e went to bed; I warmed his bed and lighted
him fo bed.

Was the person a stranger to yoo before^
—Yes, he was.

Did that person, whom you so liehted to
^^f ^"^^ yon any directions for the next
mommg? — ^Yes; I was to call him between
six and seven o'clock.

Did you doso?— YeSy I opened his door,
and called biro.

How soon afler you had called him, at six
o'clock, did you see that person again ?— He
called for his shoes and black gaiters ttuit he
had, and I saw no more of him after he went
out tiH between twelve and one o'clock.

Where did you see him then ?-*-He camd
hack to our house to breakflist.

Was any person with him when ho eame
back r— Yes.

Are the two persons here that returned to
your house after the guest had gone obt in
the morning f — ^Yes.

Who were these two persons that returned
after the guest bad gone out in the morning ?
—The person iiutheat from me (Mr, (yCon-
nor) is one.

Was that the person ((yOngfy) that dame
back ?— No.

Was that the person (Biim$) f —No.

Was Mr. OXIonnor the person? — ^No.

Which do you take to oe the persons that
came back ?— Mr. CVConnor and Mr. Bidns.

Which are the two persons w4iom yeu'now
take to be* Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Binds? —
Mr. O'Connor I cannot recollect.

Whidh are you take to be Mr. O^onnor
now ?— When I saw thetti before vt London I
knew them.

VOL. XXVI.

Are you enabled now to point out which you
in your oonscience iMsfieve to be those two
persons ? — No.

Do jrou think that by ^oing nearer to them
you should be able to point out the persons?
— I think 1 should [ihe uitness went dose to
the bar].

Do not hurry yourself, but look attentively
at all those persons, and state which you be-
lieve to be the person you lighted to bed, and
who went out early in the morning ? — That
is the Kcntlenian that slept there IpoiiUing to
Mr, 0*Connor'\ ; no, that is the person
[jfointing to Binnt'].

Who do yoo now represent yourself to be-
lieve was the person that slept at your ma»-
ter's bouse f— That gentlebiftn f A(r; 0*Con^
nor).

What did you mean just now by pointing
to the person who stands nearest to you P-^
This (Bmm) is the aentleraan that came in
the morning ahmg wUh Mr. O'Connor about
noon.

What do you mean ?->He (Binm) is the
gentleman that slept at our house.

There was but one stranger canM to your
master's house on Suujday, was there ?-^No.

Whidi of the persons do you believe was
that stranger f — This gentleman.

Mr. Justice Buller,^! have struck her evi-
dence out of »y noles.

Ddniel Valder sworn. — l^xamined by
Mr. Garrow,

You are an officer of the customs at Maiw
gate?— * Yes.

In tenetq— ate of something that had come
lo your knowledge were you upon the watch
upon the night preceding the apprehension of
the prisoners at Margate ? — I was.

Did you continue on watch till all the
boats were laid aground by the state of the
tule?-^Idid.

Did you afterwaids go lo Mrs. Crickett*s, at
Margate^ where the prisoners were apprc-»
hended ?-•! did.

Did Tou assist in their apprehension ?*— I
did.

Did aay <f the prisoners say any thing upon
that occasion with nespect to their knowledge
of each ether ?— I did not hear tliem.

You assisted in seizing the baggage like-
wise ?<^I dki.

Did you hear any conversation of the pri-
Sonera r— None at all.

Oliver Carlton, esq. sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Attorney General,

YoQ live, I believe, in Dublin P«<^l do.

What official employment do you hold
there F-^I am high constable of the district of
the metropolis.

Have the ^dness to inform me whether
you found those papers any where, and upon
what occasion ?-—I found those papers in
Leinster-house, in the apartihents of lord
BdM^rd Fkzgerald'.

4 R

1347] 38 GEORGE Ifl. Trial of ffCmgfy, O'Canm^ and Mers- [ 134S

Mr. Attorney General." -Theu an tbc two
letters which Mr. Luie proved to b« in the
hand-writing of Mr. O'Connor.

Oliver Carlton^ ^sq. cross-exanuned by
Mr. Plumer.

You live at Dublin ?— I do.

Voir know then that Mr. O'Cbnnor was
kept in close custody in the castle at Dublin
fbr six or seven months ?— He was for seveial
months.

And he was then liberated without any
trial ?^I believe so.

I believe you remember when Mr. O'Con-
nor had a seat in the Irish house of com-
mons ?— I do.

What place did he represent f— I do not
know.

He is the nephew of my lord Longueville ?
•>-I have heard and believe so.

I believe it was the beg;inmng of January,
in tlie present year, when Mr. O'Connor left
Ireland ?— I do not know the time he left it.

Mr. Attorney GenerAl^'"'Look at this letter
tubscribed James Q'Goigly P— I found all the
letters ta the same room.; I put » wafer on
them.

Mr. A^akam Ahhot sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Attorney General*

Where do you live P-'-In Cork, in Ireland.

Be so ffood as look at these two letters,
and say if you know whose hand-writine
they are ?— I beheve them to be the hanf
writing of Mr. O'Connor.

Have you seen him write ?— I have.

Mr. Attorney GMera/.-^Thoee two letters
were also proved b^r Mr. Lane to be Mr.
O'Connor's haud»writing. We will first sead
the letter ta lofd Edward Fitzgerald.

[It was read.]

" My dear Friend ;— I have had a letter
written to you these tea days, and have not
bad an opportunity of sending it to you ; you
can't conceive how it has vexed roe not to
be able to find a good, or indeed any way of
getting Maxwell off; he has been most active
10 try and get away from bis creditors, but
they so watch him, and this erobaigo by the
enemy make it most difficalt, thou||;E I think
he wiH be off in three days from this; it's said
that lord Fitz-William is going over to Ir^
land, and XhaX great kopu are entertained of
ieparating the Catkoliajrom the Union. This
will be your, and every honett man*i butineu
to prevent y and though a few of the old com-
mittee patrioti shoqld attempt it, the people
arc most honest. — I receive<l ooth your letters,
the one to Debrets, and the one by the young
men — ^I shall do a11 I can for them^ and hope
with effect in three ^s ; if that fails, I will
make it a point with Blaxwell that ha goes
by Hamburgh ; indeed he is in the greatttl
impatience to be off. The man tf considera-
tion told me he heard the government here
bad intercepted a dispatoh from Fiance for

Ireland, which promised gusal aaabtaoce.
They are here in great coaelemation, the «mv
ney and their commarce are very lam. The klack
terrier and hii Uttle brother are but iorry cart
— the latter has become a land4>roker, and, if
I am rightly informed,, has found the little
priettf and thesagar laker and main otheri have
ient him their money to lay oat for them^ and
thus to have their agent they have been at
work ; Chevalier was the person who wrote Xa
my friend to have nothing to do with NidM-
tonor hertet, for that they had fallen into am-

tempt, from the appearance tbey cut. 1

Sena two copies ot the pamphlet, but diey
must not be let out of the room you and
Pamela read them in, until you hear from me,
as otherwise I should be in limbo : there is
not one out here,, nor will there until I can do
it in safety, — ^you can have an edition printed
in IreUnd — I shall send you 100 copies
for the iOBtaBt, they ape tobesokl at three
shillings and sixpence, and of course not Va
be given to any that cannot be depended on,
to avoid prosecution. The instant I get to
Williams you shall hear from me, I tnean to he
aa motive os Icon; one of the copies are for
Dowdall, and let him insert aa much of it, or
all of it, as he likes ; ha will observe the
errata and the corrections. I -have not
words to tell you, how much I am eoo-
cerned at Pamela's illness, but I hope and
tnist she is gettins better— I send you a let-
ter for M'N*., and leave it open that you may
see it. You can seal it, and send it to him,
and send the money to HiKh Bell for me.
Adieu,, my dear fciend, be uscreet, and on
your guard. Your's, ever most sincerely.

P.S. rbave written to Emmett aboai year
friend's bail^he has a^usted his fortune^ so as
that you nor he can Se puttoanyinconve-
nienceybr^woiir cfthe money being paid,

•^ lord Edward Fitzgerald.''

Mr..ilaoni^GMerai.-^WewiU now read
the paper,, which is proved to have been found
in the razor case, which explains Williams by
the woad Fiance.

[It was read.2

Williams
Thompson

<« Spain

<" Holland

''England

''Brest

" Tcxel

"Belfast

" L. Swilly

" R. Shannon

"Galway

"Shannon

" Bantry

"KinaJe

"Cork

" Waterford

" Wtxfoid Coast

" Wicklow Coast

" Dublin Bay

Gray
Ricbs

Richards

Lisbon

Binden

Boston

Rhode Island

NewYoric

Philadelphia

Delaware

ChesDcak

Cape fear

Charles-fort

.WaUiain|»toim

KeiffoiindlaQd

New England

UonduTM Bay

U49J

«H««th Btj

«< Direct

^ 1,000 iDtfli

"< Ship of line

""Afngate .

'< Ireland

« A Musket

** A Cannon

** A Sis Pounder

^ Military Stores

« Dover

<« Calais

**^ Hamburgh

"^ Horses

"^CarU

«• Guard

^'Land

^ Years Pupchasa

« Paris

^•Beer

** Ld. Fits.

** MathewsoB

Jbr High rmioji.

Campechy

Correspondents

^1,000

A Hogshead

A Tierce

PatricksoB

ANtul

A Jarr

SixQuarU

Merchandise *

Doneahadee

Port Patrick

BaJtimope

Hooks

Lines

•<SapercarM

Silk ^

Bates of Silk

This Place

Blake

O'Briaa

Marks.

k, IX 1796.

[1350

Mr. Attorney GeneraL-"Now -we will read
the other, which is a letter to Mr. R4»rer
O'Connor. — ^There is a passage at the eoa of
the letter which has just been read " I have
written to Emmett about your friend's bail.''
— The letter to Mr. Roger O'Connor will show
what that means.

[The letter was read.]

^ Lomhn 1S<A February, 1798.

My dearest Friend^** -/ have toid all m^ pr^-
fertyto Burdett^ yet U wtay $tiU gaomtn figf
naate^amd the remit are to he trammmtiedto
Hugh Beilf No. 40'CheHer'Houte Jftiare;—
Sweeny said he would undertake to receive
the rents, and after paying all the charges,
transmit the remainder, tMre are t60/. to
William, 50L to J. Bullen, 4^. to the widow
of Hemy, and M/. to the Miss Bullens and
Wogfw, making in all 378i.-«on reeeivt of
thb you will said for Burke, and see all his
accounts, and tell him to pay the rents to
Sweeney .---Nothingcan be more confused than
his way of keeping aocmmts^I have over and
over again given him a plan for keeping them
hot he never coukl be Drought to follow it*^
Let Sweeney pve him a book and show him
how. he is toenlerlhe accounts. I bee you
will examine how his accounts stand, for I
believe he do not ever pay his own rents,
which are considerable--out of the half last
year I received but little— I oeg of you to lose
no timein putting my affiurs in the best footing
—•if you can sell the estate at Cork, Burdett
will sign the deed of sale, as he has a deed
litMn me. If this coukl be done, it wouk) be
of great me, as I could dispose of the money
to the greatest advantage--all this I depend
on your and Sweeney's exertions for.

** Your letters have gained you the great-
est credit No one that has not been struck
with them— Burdett and I have written
to you often, which from your's to iiim I
ind you never goi—we onjered jou the

€oarier'-*as lo the morning papers they are
mere lumber in your office -««so we did not
send you more than the Courier, as, in
the iNistncss of the Press, we found it use-
len to have any other-— I shall leave this to-
morrow, so that^ou will not hear from me
aj^n for some time. ^ I have heard of conces-
sions—but I lay little stress on them— jf the
people are true to Ihemulva they must be free —
Edward will hear from me more regular than
you, and will tell you of roe until we meet.
Adieu, my ever dearest friend, ever and for
ever your's.

" Nothing can be worse than the state of
their finances here — thev are alarmed to the
heart f to mueh so, as to plan desperate measures^
Scotland is Irish all creer^ the people here give
no opinion, though it is easy to learn that they
look fur a change.

**i have just heard that the government
here have stopped a letter from France to
Ireland offering the Irish support. It was told
me by a courtier ; and I believe it is the case.
Ever your's toy beloved friend.

•** I send our dear friend a letter by the
same mode I send this,«s the post-office stops
them else/*

Mr. Plumerj^i wish to «sk Mr. Carlton
two-other questions—^

'OUver£arlioa, esq«caUed again.

1 believe Mr. O'Connor was concerned as
'the editor of a newspaper called the Press?*
—Yes.

When you arrested Mr. O'Connor you seijb-
ed all his papers that you found ?-*-All that I
found in his possession.

I believe you afterwards seized all bis bro-
ther, Mr. Roger O'Connor's papers ?— No, I
did not.

Were you not present when they were
seized ?— No.

He h^ been in gaol too for mt^ay months T
— I believe for some months.

And was liberated in Ireland ? — I belteee
so.

Mr. Attorn^ Genera/.*— Do you mean to
say that Mr. Arthur 0*Connor was concerned
in the paper called the Press ?-^Yes.

Poyou know that fact ?-^Yes ; I know his
name was at the bottom of the paper called
the Press.

You never saw his name registered at the
Stamp office, did vou ? — ^No.

Mr. AUorney Ueneral. — I will now prove
the hand-writing of Mr. O'Coigly to the letter
foimd Ij Mr. Carlton at Leinsler house. .

Mr. Frederick Button called aniu.—Examin*
ed by Mr. JMomey Oeneral.

Do you know whose hand-writing this let«
ter is ?^It is Mr. 0*Coigly's to the best of my
belief.

* As to whieh see the case of Pelcr Finerty
ante p. 90L^

]3$1] 38GE0RG]^IIL Trial of O.Caigig^aQmnct and oihm [ISfiS

[It was read.]

<f Dublin Jam Mhi nw.
<' Citixen ;— You will please to Konain aS;
boine bo-morrow, as I intend to call ufon yon
procisely at aevoa o'clodc in thf evctmog^loi
talk over thai biuiness of tho letter, and.
other affairs of that buaioess Hkewiae.

^ James CoioLY."
'f To Citken Fifczf|erald»

commonly called
Lord Edward Fits^rald.'' .

Mr. Frederick Dutton cross-examined by Mr.

Gumey,

Piay, bow roai^ informations may you have
]aid in Ireland, in the course of the last three
or four years ?— Indeed I could not telL

I would not tax your memorv too closely ;
do you think you can eyess within fifty f — I
do not know whether 1 am obliged lo answer
that question ; I beg the protection of th6
Court.

Mr. Garrov.— I should doubt whether, in
the present state of Ireland, this examination
may not be dangerous.

Mr. Gumey, — When a witness comes to
relate a fact, especiallya&ct against a prisoner
surely I have a right to shake his credit Ji^
any means in my power ; and it is one mode,
if I prove bin to be a* common informer.
I may have, and I have other questions to
follow this, which I conceive to be of consi-
derable moment tothe . credit'of this witness.
I submit that, as a fouQ()ation for the ftiture
<|iiestions I have to ask, I am strictly regular
in asking whether he can tell the number of
informations, he has laid wjthiD the last two
or three years.

Mr. Attorney General. — What is meant by
that? for it is an ordinary sort of phrase which
I cannot tmderstand.

Mr. Gurney.— Then I should hiive thought
ihat was a reason whV the question should
not have been objected to by counsel. If the
witness says he does not understand it, that is
another reason.

Mr. Aitomev General,^ ^"Do you mean in-
formations before a magistrate.

Mr. Giim^.-^Take it so— what number of
informations he has given before magis-
trates ? - -

Mr. Justice Bii/2er.--He savs he is under
^protection of the Court : if be thinks him-
selfentitled to the protection of the Court, to
prevent htm from answering, he must state a
litUe more.

Dti^lon.— If it is a fair qyestion, andagreea-
bleloyour l<M:d8hip, X will answor it The
answer is this-^I am on my oath now— and I
believe, if I recollect, you asked me whether
I could recollect within GUty ; my answer is»
I never lodged fif\y informations m my life.

Mr. Gtimey.-— llow many have you lodged f

I>trffim.— I could not say* upon- my oath;
exactly, bat I really do not ktw^ that I ef er
lodged ten.

Mr. Attorney Gwk^ro/.— Is it t&j be »ked
in evQiy bast against what individual, and
upon what aaoMUit. that informatkin has
been M^d-d

Mr. Justice BuUer.^'No, Mr. Gurney has
notgonetoAhat.

Mr. Attorney Gejieral.—IAT. Gnmty pro-
fesses attempting to discredit the witness, by
getting out the number of informatinns he has
given ; I bive a r'^Ht to set up the credit of
the witness, by askio| him to the fote of those
informations, who are the individuals named
in all of them; and what the effect ofthat
may be, may be worth consideralioa on all
sides.

Mr. Justice Buikr.'^Aud therefore, if any
inconveuence or mischief is likely to arise
from it, the Court ought to be told- so, but I
cannot divine it.

Mr.Garrov.-^ThatseemedthegfoniidnpoQ
which the witness meant, u it seemed' to me,
to make his objection. The question put was
how many informations have you given— do
you think you calk giiese within fifty^i Mr.
Gurney states as the groand of bisqueMion;
that he hss a right to iivpeach his cvedil by
proving him to be a -common informer, itftof
the ft te of observations lately upon IJbat avb-
ject^ about persons who* an ignominiously
called spies, I hardly expected, that wonld \m
stated as a ground of imputation to a witness.
I am to learn, that any information, for the
purpose, ef advancing toe' piiUlic justice of the
country, is a groilnd of impntalion.' lam
sure, iot no times > could tho justioe of tbn
country be administered, if that ia taken as a
broad, proposition to Ui stated ian eouitof
jujAicoi The witness throws himself'.upori
the Court wiiekher he is bonadftaanswcptaat
(|aestiott; «iid if it is to be askcd^ hoi^anany
infMnations'he baa iaid^ Knd.it is b^tnd
tbero^it is indirectly attacking tlw cradit of
the witness^ without 0i«tn§ VSl am q|f«rt»>
nity to defend himseff. Whatfolioivs^ Wiq^
upon the part of the crown we dudl )io bMoai
to ask against what manner of ptissns
and what jMutieular individuals •—of what cfaia*
ses-<tfid what societies this person bas giiea
informations-*->what hasfaeenthe foieiaf thSHi
whether troo or false" ■ nod whether the^
tended to the administfUtioaof jiistica^orw
foaiing it, which I admits if fotiBded<in-folsB<
hood would disgrace the.'witndu^ but wd
have beard, froni the highest anthori^^ the*
the witness is nft to be impfeuhf d^ hri'Bmt
he has been so eraniined>aa a./ifilMaa? if
tbcQT- can produce aoyt rteord of coiivieliapv ^
shew he has cooduoted 'ihiinsiAf oo aa;ta A*
arkce him, thai is aUdtfasT) tfaiii|^ bul if itia
by. a wfaolesale'S«o«inna'quefllieQ,-lefitthhoi»
oftsQ this gentleman osabeen iBStnuBoatai
in advancing the publiojostice'of the ossmtfjr
I'protest against that as any gnHmdef *at-
ttoking any witnessfa citodit;

Mr. G«rasy.--I hope and believe I have
not been so absura^ aa^ by way of dia^
csediling a wilness, ioaalrhinrhowirf^ii*

13SS]

far Ui^ Tteason*^

rK. B. 1?9<«

[fd54

has contributed to the advanoenie&t' of th«
pat4ic justice of the* councry ; neither have I,
under colour of addressing the Court on a
point of law respecting the admissibility of
evidence^ made an address intended for other
ears on the eifect of the evidence. I have
asked this <fae8tion of the witness (with a view
to ask farther questions which I expect will
impeach his credit)^ how many informations
he has laid ; I may pursue that the length of
asocrtainin^ that he is a common informer;
a common informer, in one sense, mav be a
very bad character; it is possible,' and barely
possible, id the other senses^ that he may not
De a bad character. . Possibly I may go on to
show that this is a man of so infamous a cha-
racter, that his informations have been re-
jected on that very account; I mav go on to
show his evideilce has been rejected in a court
of justice on that account ; it is possible I may
prove that by evidence ; theretbre I submit
this is a proper qiie^ion.

Mr. JosQce Bullet,— ll is meant, I under-
stand it now, to throw an imputation upon
him; then he is entitled to the protection of
the Court.

. Mr. Owmey^-^If I asked ' him a question
which would cbavict him of a erime^ t^en,
my lord, he would be entitled to the protection
vftheXiourt.

Mr. Justice BulUr. — We are all df opinion,
as it stands now, that the question ought not
to be put

Mr. Justice Lawtence^ — ^Tou mumdt follow
up the question, by asking him whether he
has been believed.

Richard Ford, esq. called agaio.-^Examineci
by Mr. Attorn^ GeneraL

These prisoners wvre Imiught before you at
Bow-street, I understand ?— They were.
■ Dk) you take the examinations • of any of
them in writing ?—^Y«8, the «xamination ^
the prisoner O'Coigly.

Were you present afterwards cS^hen the
prisoners, or any of them, were examined be-
fore the Secretary of state ? — ^I was present
when they were all eiounibed before the Se-
cretary of state.

Dici the prisoner OX)oigly sign his exami*
nation ?-«He dk) not.

Did you propose to him to sini the exami-
nation f — I did, and he dedinea it.

Wae it proposed to the several prisoners in
your presence to sign the examinations that
were taken before the Secretary of state? — I
cannot exact^ say. whether it was to all of
them; I ratherthink ' it was$ I an^ sore it
was to Mk** OX^onoor^ I a*r sure it was to Mr.
(yCoigly ; 'them wae no examination redoeed
10 writtngof Mr. Binns; I believe MK Allen
also refused to sign his examination ; I have'
no correct recolKotion about' the prisoner
Leary.

Have you got the examiAatfons that were
taken at Bow^street^ and beforc> the Secre-
tary of state, which tfatey refused to sign ?
—I have.

We^e 3(ou the person who took down those
examinations at the' time ?— t Was * this is the
one I took at Bow-street.

JttcAarci Pord, esq. cross-examloed by ■
Mr. Plimer* . ,

Was not the reason why Mr. O'Coigly would
not sign it, upon its being read over, that he
said it was not correct ? — ^No, that was not
the reason.

Did he not say so .>-— No.

Was there no observation of that sort made f
—Mr. 0*Coigly at Bow-street said it was the
purport of what he had to say, hut that he diA
not choose to sign it. Mr. O'Connor's exaini-
nation took op some time, and he and I alVet^-
wardfl went into another rootil, wtiiire it wa»
settled, as far as I beliete it could= t^, to hi^
satisfaction, but he declined signing it-
Mr. Attorney Genet^L'-rDo I understand
you right, that after it had been taken; M^.
O'Connor and yon settled it together to his sa^
tisfkction ?— Mr. O'Connor was examined be«
fbre the memb<jrs of the qouncil, and I tooi
down a note of what he said ; that was after-
ward^ conied by one of the eleriis, and copied
incorrectly ; when it was read over the next day
to Mr. O'Connor, he objected to many things,
that tbe^ had not been writtcfri as he stated ;. I
was desired to gO into another rooili with Mf^.
O'Connor to settle the examinatioil by our-
selves, and I settled it to Mks O'Connor's sa-
tis^tion ; Mr. O^Connor dictated a good deal
d( it to nh ; there was nothing' l' took down
that I' did not ^aftefwards r^ to him, and
hkve his assisnl 10 it.

Mr. P/umer.— Did yod tell' cither of tbfse
gentlemen, when you were' taking down their
examination, that it might be produced a^tnst
themf — ^No.

Yon did not give them any notice4>f th(A P
—No.

Mr. Atttn-ney General, — What was said to
the persons who were examined in your pre?
senee by the Sedretaiy of state, before anv
questions were pot to thetn f — They were told,
as all the prisoners I have been present at the
examination of befbre the Secretary of stale'
have been always told, wh^n brought in, that
the charge agiiinst them is of such and such
a nature; that they may decline answering
any question timt they feel at all to affect
them.

Mr. iyConnor, — Did I not, at the council)
when' I saw you writing, makeanobjectioi\
to any thing I said beina' taken in writine, as
it was so liaUe to mistake^— I rather think
yda objected * yotr seemed to think something
migfat be :taken down iii an unfair way ; it
wa^ upon that gtound afterwards that you
were de^redtO do me the favour of going into
^e next rooito, and settling your examination
^Ith m^ \b 'YbMt own satisfaction.

Mr. O^Conner, — Do you recoUect,' when if
^eotinto that room, that I ol^ected to roost
parts as it had been taken dowo ?— As it had'
been taken d6wi\ l>efore.

1S55] 88 GEORGE lU. Trudofff

O^CoHM&r and Men

[1338

Mr. O'C(mii0r,-4)o you rtoolbct that jou
were nither fighting to have a good deal ra-
lained, which I was rather uowiUing should P
— I will sute how 1 feel that in my own
mind at present You said a great number
of things Uie day before (whether relevant
'or not I have nothing to do with) which the
next day^ or the di^ after, when you were in
the other room with me lo aettle the exami-
nation, you wished to alter ; many of them
had no ^reference at all to the charge; those
ihiugs were altered certainly ; a great number
of thing9 were struck out, and I believe I
might have said, in answer to your question,
** why, it does not much signify, you certainly
said that, it may as well stand as not/'

Mr. O'CoiMor.— You constantly said, <' It
does not signify.*' To hasten the matter, I
brought in the paper to the duke of Portland ;

{ou wanted me to sign it in tlie state il was ;
did not choose to sign it, but 1 am not con-
scious that there is any thins in it.

Mr. Attorney General.'^^ta there any
thing put down in the first paper that Mf;
O'Connor did not declare f— Nothing.

Richard Ford, esq. cross-examined by
Mr. Urgutton,

Whether you can bring to your recollection
whetlier the prisoner Allen was asked to sign
bis examination ? — I can hardly say whether
he was examined or not; if he was, it was
veiy slight Yes, I have a minute of his exa-
mination; I think he was asked U> sign it,
but he did not sign it; but I do not state it
with that certainty that I do with respect to
Mr. O'Connor or Mr. aCoigly.

Mr. Mtorii^ Geaerat^Did Mr. 0*Coidiy
call himself Mr. Ftvey. to }rou P— I asked htm
what his name was ; be said it was Fivey.

{The Examination of James John Fivey, taken
before Mr. Ford, r»d.]

^ Watmuuter to «if .-^The examination of
James John Fivey,of Dublin^tn Ireland, who
aays, that being m an ill state of health, he
went into Rent, with a view of passing a short
time in the neighbourhood ol the sea, pre-
viously to his 9om|c to Dublin, having an ex-
pectation of gomg w some trading vomoI back
to Dublin in a few days-4hat faS went down
there (to Whitstable) in a Whitstable hoy,
embarked near the Custom-house at Chester-
kev, on board the said hoy, and arrived at
Whitstable on that night Ibat a young gen-
tleman, named Allen, who was introduced to
him a few days before, proposed to go for a
few days with him prevMMisly to his ffoing to
Jamaica, where his brother lives ; tnat said
Allen was introduced to him a few days be-
fore by an Irishman, whose name he forgets,
but rather believes to be one Hamilton. That
Allen is an Irishman, and is now in custody ;
that another gentleman and his servant went
on board with him, who are 8trang|ers to him ;
that he saw the name of Moms on their
trunks; that the linen striped bii& apaif of

iaddW-bag% tnd a leather portmanteau, mH
now produced and marked by John Revett, ia
examinant's presence, were his (exaroinanVs)
luggage. That he recollecls having seen the
three mahonny boxes now shown him, and
marked by Kichisrd Smith, and another box
in a leather case, and rather thinks they bo-
longed to the gentleman he saw on board the
hoy. That the paper-board box now produced,
he also remembers to have belonged lo said
Allen.^And this examinant says he last lived
in Greek-street, in Dublin, at Mr. Marmion's,
and is of no particular business ; that he haa
been in London ever since May last,excepcine
a short time at Mr. Campbell's at Liverpool,
and lodged in Barton-street, Westminster,
and with Dr. Macan,in Charles-street, West-
minster, and elsewhere. That when at Whit-
stable, one Perkins offered to take him to
FlushiDg, which examinant refused, meaning
to go to Margale.
<« Taken by me, this 1st March, 1798,

^RiCHAao Foaok^

Mr. P/iisier.*«Where was the luggage
marked f — ^At Bow-street

By whom?— I directed it to be marked;
I thmk I saw Smith mark it; lam dure it was
marked b^ some of the persons that camo
from Whitstable; it was marked in the mom
in which I was.

Were the prisoners there ?-— I cannot say
whether they were or not.

Mr. Justice BkiJ^er.— Had Ot?oigly seen
the luggage, when that examination was
taken? — It was in the same room, he was
close to it, and when these boxes were marked,
they were pointed out to him.

Mr. Plumer,^li is here stated as a fact,
that they were all marked by Revett, in his
presence.

Mr. Fortf.-^That b n^ writing, I wrote it
from what passed at the time.

[The Examination of John James Fivey, taken
before his Grace the Duke of Portland,
read.]

** The examination of James John Fivey.-*
This examinant says that his name is Fiv^^
and thathit Irish name is Otloigl^, Orig mean-
ing in Irish j^ve ; he is of no parocular profes-
sion, and declines answering whether he is in
ordcMTs or not , be caUse to En^and about the
latter end of M^ last ; he did not ensage the
Whitstable hoy before hand, but ti^d a saik>r
he designed going, and made no particular
agreement; hesenthisbagpige,butdeciinea
answering bv whom ; he meant to have staid
at Whitstable if he bad found good todginga ;
firom thence he went by knu to Maigtfe,
across the country, with a person who shmd
him the road; he walked; two of thaceoi-
pany who were in the hoy joined him; he
may have seen Mr. O'Connor before, but bad
no connexion with him. Mr. OX>onaor went
to Canterbury, he bad no direetioo to exami-
nant at Margate. Examioaat came to tbe

1S37]

ff^ High Treason.

A. D. t798«

[1358

inn^ first; tliough Mr.O'CoDnoff servant and
another young man, by name Alien^ came
before him. £iaminant had been introduced
to Allen before by an Irishman, as stated in
his former examination. He has seen Binns
at a public meeting in the last summer, but
has no particular acquaintance with him ;
he thinks Binns went by the name of Wil-
Hams» but has no direct knowledge of it : exa-
niioant is sore he did not see him at Whit*
stable, or any where between London and
Margate, and that he had no kind of commu-
nication with Williams about getting a vessel
at Whitstable. And this examinant farther
says, that he did not know that O'Connor
went by any other name, but he saw the
name of colonel Morris written on the trunks ;
examinant bad no great-coat with him, nor
was there any great-coat in the room when
he was taken ; there were several great^coats
in the party, but he don't remember who
wore them. Examinant should have re-
mained at Margate, and have lefl his company
ia a few hours ; he inquired for lodgings, the
girl at the inn said she knew a person who
would let some cheap, and that she would
make inquiries. £»uninant was not in
health; he paid for the hoy a guinea; the
man gave him a receint ; the gentleman de-
sired nim to pay for all tlie party ^ — Exami-
nant [being shown a paper, No. 1, signed
O'C. and marked J. Revett*] he says he does
not know the hand-writing, or whether it was
meant to be addressed to him. Examinant
has been in Plough-court Fetter-lane, and
may have had letters directed to him there ;
[being shown a pocket-book, green and gold,
produced by Revett] he says it was not found
upon him ; he declines answering as to the
letters of ordination found on him ; he knows
nothing of a paper directed to lieutenant
Johnes [now shown to him] or of a letter from
Manchester, signed Wm* rarkinson, directed
to Amsterdam ; he never saw the paper pur-
porting to be an Address to the Directory of
France : no money in the basgage belonged
to him, he supposes it belongedto the person
who had it in his caro. Examinant denies
the great-coat to be his; the baggage was
taken rare of b^ the gentleman; examinant
saw something like the coat in the cart; says
that he dined with Binns and O'Connor, and
that Allen and O'Connor's servant dined ti>-
gether; being shown a stock buckle [pro-
duced by John Revett], he says he had one,
but does not know whether that is it or not;
[being shown a dagger, produced bv John
Revett] he says he bonght it near Capel-street^
on the north side the nver in Dublin ; he did
not order it, but found it ready made; when
be came to Ijondon, he lodged in Barton-
street, at.No. bt, up two pair of stairs ; lately
he has had no lodging, but sla»t occasionally
at a^quaintaqces ; the last qignts be slept at

* Being the note beginning ^ Dear Jones.''
Vide page 1295.

Hamihon^a in Holbom: he knows Evans of
No. 14, Plough-court, but does not know whe*
ther he is a member of the Corresponding
Society. Binns of Fetterlaner is a member
of that society, as examinant believes. Ex^
minant had the care of the baggage from
Whitstable to Margate, but knew nothing of
its contents; they were to settle with him at
Margate; examinant never saw it opened bul
by the revenue officer at Whitstable^— £a^
minant does not know one Mahoney at Can-
terbury, or any other person there,nor had he
any recommendation to any person there, or
direction; he does not know any person
named Williams; [being shown a paper in
pencil, marked 3 Fivey, and prodoiwd by
John Revett*] examinant says, he does not
know it ; that he does not know Mr. Murphy
in Dover-street, Piccadillv ; [being shown a

Esper marked 7 Fivey, John Revett] he says
e does not know the hand- writing, nor m
paper marked No. 6, Fivey ; he says he has
seenCrossfieldf and colonel Despard.t but
does not know much of them. He knowa
also one Sluchey a taylor, near Bloomsbury,
but does not know Palmer.
'* Taken before me, this 5th day of Mareh,

1798. POATLAND.'^

Rkhard Tardy eso. cro8»' examined by
Mr. rlumcr.

Whether particular Questions were not nut
to the prisoners when tney were examined?—
There were.

Is any one of those questions put down in
this examination?— Not one, excepting where
it says, ** being shown such a paper,'' ot
** being asked,*'

Have you taken down the answers without
taking down the qnestions ? — I took it down
in the nature of an examination.

Then when a question is put and negatived,
it is not noticed. You do not mean to repre-
sent that this contains everr thing that
passed ? — ^I should upon my oath refer to that
paper, as a pretty correct transcript of what
passed.

I dare say that you took down correctly
what appeared to you to be material upon the
subject. I do not know that you were awar^
at the time it would be .produced in a court
of justice ?— There vras a great probability
that might be the case; I took it down as
completely as I could, there were a numbei
of things whkh I did not think it was material
to put down.

I understand then you did not apprize the
prisoners, that these would be made use of
against them, as evidence, which I take for
grained, you would have done if you had
expected \U There is nut one question put
down ? — No.

Mr. AUan/ey General. — Is not this the con«

* Being the direction toi Mr. Rean Mahoney.
f See his trial, p, 1, of this volume.
X See his casoi A. t>« 1903, infri.

1359] S8 GEORGE flf. Trial o/CyCoigfy, O^Cormbr And others [IS60

stant course in which ^xaminaUons are takeii >
«^Ve9; I have attendeil tile privy council for
jteors, anit this it Ibe manner in wllich exami-
ftfltioob are always takendowti^ at the privy
council,' and at Bow-street

- ' Mr. Justice Bii/ler.>^Did you read this over
to the party ?^I am almost certain I did.

' Mr. Attorney General. — Is it not the con-
staht practice to read them over to the party
alterwamls? — ^I am almost certain I did.

- -Mr. Xudtke Butler, — Have you any doubt
whether yen did or not? — I very strongly
fhiak-that they were read over to them.

' Mr.' Biumer, — But you will not be post*
five*? — I will not be so positive as I am that
Mr. O'Connor's was read over to him, because
that nassed in a room iii which he and I were
togetner, and I remember taking particular
ncmceorttut.

' Mr. Justice BuUer.-— ^Have you any memory
whether the examination taken in Bow-street
#as read over to 0'Ck)lgly ? — ^It was read over
fi> him, and he was asked if he would sign it;
And he was asked also whether he would sign
thM before th^ privy council.

Mr. Plumer. — It would be very material to
see the questions.

Mr. Justice Btr//fr.— I never saw an exami-
nation with the questions.

Mr. Garrom, — According to the direction
of the statute, this is precisely the form that
has been constantly adopted. — ^Your lordship
recollects inXamb's case, it was precisely in
this form, and be was executed upon it;
afler it had faeea saved for the opinion of all
fhejodges.

I^he Examination of Mr. O'Connor, takea
before his grace the duke of Portland, read.]

MiddUtex} The Examination of Arthur
to wU, { O'Connor, esq.

<' This examinant says that he embarked,
on Sunday moriiing la^t, some where liear
the ToM^er. That his purpose was, to go/ ' to
Whitstable, his ultimate intMtibn being to
go to Margate ; that he did not know any
person of the name of Fivey ; there wera
l^ple \a the boy, andkmongsttbefn, a very
old 'man, and some otheft, but how many M
does not r^ltoct—Being^ asked whether he
knows one Binns, he declined answering as
to him, or any other person : he declares un-
Bmiledly that he baa fio intention to liave
^6ne to France, or had engaged any vessel
whate^rer for Ihat purpose ; that he landed 'at
Whitstable, and was afterwards at M[argate,
but does not say with whom. That he heard
thiat hfs baggage was examined at Whitstable,
though he was not present; Imt as the Iwg-
nge lias been a long time out 'of his'posses-
Sioa, he defines toying what part of it be-
longed to bim; that he told nis servant to
fake his baggage to Margate, hut heard that
h^ «ould not get it conveyed by water. That
examinant weot ftom WhiUtable to' Canterl
bury, in his way to Mftigate. Says that he
does not know a persou named Maboney, at

Cantcvbuiy ; respecting the baf^age he says»
ftom iu fanving been opened since it was io
his possession, he dedines specifying what
part belongs to him ; that he is no ways ac-
countable for what may be in the baggaee,
took having himself kept the keys of it; he
•avs there are sotne mahogany boxes which
belonged to him, that there appeared to be
9 boxes that had money, but as they and
the keys have been sometime out of bis pos.
session, it would be imprudent in him to be
acooimtable for their contents; that he knows
of no paper that can apply to him, and that
he never kept a paper that any person ouebt
not to see, and that he is convinced^ that
when the iMxes were in his possession, there
was no political paper in them ; but that there
was money in them belonging to him; that
he thinks there are 4 rouleaus of 40 guincaa
each, In one bos ; that he does not exactly
know the amount in the other, but that it
contained louis.— ^aya be bought, the louis ia
London, from a gentleman who got them, he
does not choose to name him ; that he had
had an intention to have gone to Harofaui^;
ihat he was expectine.liBttevs conveying iniel*
ligeHoe of his bail, vnach were to determine
the time of his gointf t6 Ireland, and that he
had an intentkia to hiive sent his baggage bv
sea to Irekuid ; says that he seldom travels
bv his ovhi name, and that he had seen some
of his thioBS marked with the name of
Morrts; he decline saying whether he evei
#ent by the name of Maxwell ; and this exa*
minant declines saying axqr thing, as to who
was with him at any particular time; he does
not wish to be thought connected with any
body else, but to stand clear of all other
persons. — ^That he gave his servant money to

Ky for his fore, and of course supposes that
did so; that he should not hwve autbo*
riaed him to have paid for any body else ; that
he had *had a jacket made when he had an
iatehCioo to have «me to Switzerland, which
may be m his tramc ; that he meant to have
paid a viait to lord Thanet, and lard Stanhope,
mm irhoih he had received invitatbns ; that
he bad a case of pistols made bv Manton,and
anothoteaia which he had had finxnaftiend,
but timt he is not anawembje for any thing
that tiUy be found in those cases m the
same reison be gave with regard to the other
bokes. '

** Taken before me, tbb 5th day of'BIarch,

1798. POHTLAVP.'^

Mr. Attorne^f 0«a<ral.—-We have a tiaiisla-
tkm of the paper found iii the possession of
Mr. O^Coigly.

Mr. PlaifMr.— I believe Mr. OCooner when
he wasasked upon the sulject of that dress
stated that he had aKvi(fk,. when abtoad^
travelled as^afttiilitary wamf

Mt. aCmn^^l saM Ihad tmvvttHi in
qompapy wi\^ eenerel Hutclmnon, ana that
lalways'^tratelMdasaimlilati matti vkkh
I found most convenient. ' J

1961]

ffp tfigh Tritt^m,

A. D. 1799.

eisqs

, Mr. Plmer^l /ol^m |hat w not pu|
dpwQ in the e^^amituitioh?

Mr. Attorney Cenerolr- Was that put down
upon the first day 'a examination, and struck
ppladerw^urds, when you an<i Mr. O'Connor
settled it to Mr. O'Counor'3 satisfaction ?— I
recollect particularly that I had written down
^ military jacket^''-- and that upon the second
examination, when settling it to Mr. O'Con-
nor's satis^tion, Mr. O'Connor objected to
the woiti « militfwy,'' tjjerefore I struck it put,
and left it jacket ^ .

Mr. O^Cimnor.^Did I not state that it was
a walking jacket* which I intended for Swit-
zerbind i^Jfit. O'Connor walked up and down
th^ ropip, and dictated the words, and he will
clo me the justice to say that I wro^ them
4owa as be dictated.

Mr. Attorney General.— In order to set this
fjgfiti I must ask whether a great (art of
Yflva Mr. O'Connpr Iiad stated upon his nrst
ttc^n^io^tion, was not struck out, at the se-
cond, at his own instance f^lX was.

Mr. O'Ccwnor.— When I first began the
examinatbb, wheUier I dSd not say, I oould
pofi think of saying ^J- laore unless the paper
was to be shown me attec it was written, and
unless any pivt that I thought misrepresented
waatobestrufik put? , , ,

Mr. Ford.'>^IX9^oa mean the second day ?

Mr. 0'C<mfior.— No, the first d^y.— It was
I9pn thai groun4 I was desired t9 settle it
|lie next day to yowr ;saUsfaction.

Mr. O'Cowir.— Then I desire you will re-
cpU^ct wheUier I did not particularly mention
ihai t had tr«bvpUed in cwipany with general
Hutchinson as a military man f— I remember
wVvat you state perfectly well, excepting that
t do not recollect the name of the military
gentleman you mentioned.

[An extract from the pocfcet-bpok, found on
the person 6f John B'mns, read. J

£, i, d.

^91. Crn^esend boat, « • 0
<< Coaph to Reehesier, • 0
<« Bedefidmakl, . - 0

^ 99. Breakfast, supper, and waiter, 0

brandy and water, -
** Coach to Canterbury, S7^
« Coachman and expences,
" pinner, - . -
** Brandy and water, Whit,
*' Supper, bed, and breakfast,

f< 23. Whit punch,

'" t) inner," . - -
« Tea, B. and W. - -f
** Bed and maid, ••

<< 94. Coach to Deal, IB,

** Coachman and breakfast,
" Dinner, - • -
<< Horse, F. 17 1 charge, -

« Expences i^erej -

" Deal, - * - -

« Fost 18, li »• - -

. « Boy, . . . .

"** Turnpike, • - -
VOL, XXVI,

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1

0
0

1 0

3 6

1 s

4 3
1 0
8 6

1 6

2 6
8 0
a jO

5 0
2 0
2 0

1 a

6 6
2 6

2

11
1
S

0
0
0
0
0

o

0

1,

1

18
9
2
1
1
1
1

0
O
6
0
0
0
6
0

« Tea, -^ - -
'^' Coach to London, 54,

*^ fiupper, '^ *
^ 25. Coach to Than, r
** Boat to overtake hoy,
*' Graveseadi -
*f pinner,

^' Horse, - ■* -
« Te^, oats for horse, Ncwiogtoij/'

[Noie.Tlielastsevenaiticle6writlenin pencil.]
[On the other sUe of the leaf.]
" Mr. Hayman, junior, Middle-street, be^
''toknowifMr.Moule or Mr. Campbell is
"athome,'^ . ,
|Tbe foUpwing paper, found qh tlie person of

.JannBinns,re94-]
*f ^gtt Caplain'8.Nam0 as my own
^ My Oouaiii - ^.^ * • The Vessel's Name

0
0
0
O

% 6

a 0

0 0

^ Iwgarct - - *
** Safety * * p i- •• - -
^ Lujggage .-♦-»-•
^< Departure «• •« r t
'« Whititable - ^ ^ •
^CaaterhiOT r r r ^^
<< Gnweaena Boat - -
** Rochester - - - - -

Margate Hoy
AgDPeable >
Incumbsance
Deployment
The Church
Dfacon
Blair's GratB
Clergy
400perAnf).

^ Coach *• ^

** Waggon -I • . - - e 800 per Ann.

•* Guineas ..-.-- SfaUong. ,

" Ctai^ Bppkaeller, Canterbury.'' *
rrbe following beuie pwired, ^y Wr. f^rt, ftp
be a faithful trafi^lation pf the FrencU Pas^
port waa read.] *
«*No.448 Liberty EquaUty Oralis

a«

o

« French
« lUpuhlic

« The MtnisterPlenipotentlary of the French
'< Republic, at the Batavian Republic

« Requires the Corps AdminislraliCs, aind
«« all officers, civil and military, freely to let
« pass Citizen James J. Coigly , American IVa-
« veller— Native of Boston— Department of

w 11 resident at Boston, 35 years of

«f age, five feet four inches high, greyisil hair
" and eyebrows, open forehead, moderate
« nose., nlue eyes, middling sized moulh,
*' round chin, round and full face, goirtg to

"Paps.. ^ ,

" Tfte present valid only for two Decades,
« and fcou^lersigned by one of the Secretaries

** of Legation. . ^ ., ^..

"The llwie, -the «5th FrucUdor-rfiflti
** year of UicBcpublic, One and Indivisible.

"The Minister Plenipotentiary df the
" French Republic. " F. Noel.'^

• " X, 5. \* The Bearer of the

I '« in Bmnd, /" James J. Coioly.

*^ The Secretary of the Lqeation,
^'•5at««^toi\,MweReceipt, «F.Fouo»*.''

4S

1303] 98 GEORGE HI. TneitftyCd^ly, ffCamm and Men
On the Kveiic U written as followt:

[1364

now know, «f your own knowledge, or from
« -n .1 - « 1. -rv« * TT f the information of Binns. to liave been hie
"Examined at the Police Offiee *t Vden- rtyf-Icannotsayldo.

M

cienne^ the S8th Fractidori Mb year^MA*

LOM.

r-

C <' X. 5.; The Card of Hospitality being
" returned ^livered by virtue of a Letter
" from the Minister of the General Police)
** and sent to the Administration of the De-
** partment for the Exchange of a Pass]>ort
** conformable to Haw, this 91st Brumalre,
« 6th year.

^< For the Administrators Cuius.

^' F, No. 13^ Examined by Us Adminis-
" trators of the Department of the Seine^ the
** Passport on the other side naving been de-
** livered to James J. Coigly, American Tra-
** veller, who wishes to go to Boeton in Ame-
" rica ; Referred to the Central Office of the
** Canton of Pane, in the Department at
'* Paris, the twenty-sixth Brumaire, 6th year
'' of the French Republic, One and Indivisi-
** ble. — La Blahc— Brxmse— Joubekt.

*' Examined at the Central Office of the
<< Canton of Paris, the 97tb Bnimaire, 6th
" year.

' '*L,S, \^ For the Admmis-

Ceutral Offiee at I tratora
Paris, Ath Year. / •'Cwus.''

r** L. 8. \ Examined at the Office
** Beparlment I of Armaments, the Per*
*^oftke Snae.y wa mentioned on the
other side going to Hamburgh, on board the
Danish slM>p tne Two Sisters, Capt. Peter^i
son, at Havre, the second Frimaire, An. 6.
— DuPLESsis, Olivault.

«

" Esfamined by the

*' principal Commissioner^LE Rot.

** Examined" at the Police Office, at
'< Havre, to proceed to the place of his desti-
<* nation, the 2nd Frimaire, 6th year of the
^* Republic, One and Indivisible.

*' Commune, Conur. of Police.
'' Malthieu
'' Examined by the Provincial Commissary,

« 3 December, 1797.
" A. Scot."

John Jonet sworn.— Examined by Mr. Garremy

I believe vou live in Lincoln's Inn ?•— I do.

Do you know a person of the juune of
Evans, in Plough-court ?— Yes.

Do you know the prisoner, Binns ?-*I do.

Do you remember seeing Mr. Binns, on
Thursday, the first of March, any where ?-*I
did.

Where did you see him?— The first I saw
of him was in a post chaise, in Fleet*street, &i
custody.

Did you upon that gpo to Evans's house f—
I did.

Did you take away firom that house any
thing which beloneed to Binns ? — I took away
a box, which I understood-^——

Did you take away any thing which you

It

YOU took a box away from Evanses house,
in consequence of seeing Binns in custody, in
Fleet- street?— I did.

Where is that box ?— I do not know.

Should you know it if you saw it again f— I
believe I should.

Did you see it seized by Mr. Schaw, at
Messrs. Sidebottom and Cook's chambers ?-*<
I did.

Did Mr. Schaw, the messenger, take you
and that box to Whitehall f— He did.

Was the box there broke open in your pre-
sence } — It was open when t went into the
council chamber.

Was it shut at the time Mr. Schaw and you
went to the office ? — ^Ycs.

When you went into the offiee you found
it open ?— To the best of my recollection it
was the -second time I was eaUed into the
office that I found it open.

John JofUif cross-exanuncd by Mr. Dallas.

Was this box locked or open when

Was this box locked or open when it was
taken away from Mr. Evans's?— It was fast.

Was it kept fast at Lincoln's Inn ?— Yes.

How long did it remain in your possession
before it was seised by the messenger f-p-
About a week.

I think you said you seized and took this
box away after you saw Binns in custody, in a
post chaise, in Fleet-street ? — ^Yes.

Mr. Garrow, — Did you seise it adversely,
or take it under your care F— I took it under
my care*

And while it was under vour eare, at Mr.
Sidebottom's, it was seized b^ the messenger ?
—Yes.

Are you acquainted with Mr. Binns's band-
writing ? — I have seen him write, but am not
acquamted with bis manner of writing.

Mr. John Schaw sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Garrom,

Did you upon Thursday, the 8th of March
last, seize a dox at Messrs. Sidebottom and
Cook's, and apprehend tiie last witness,
Jones ? — Yes.

Did you take both the box and the wit^
ness to the Secretary of state's office?— Yes-
Was the box fast locked when vou carried
it to the Secretary of state's officer— It was.
Did you see it broken open there ^-^I as-
sisted in breaking it open.
Where is the TOX ? •

[The box was prodkiced in Court] •

John Jones called again.— Exaouned by Mr.

Go

Upon seeing Binns in custody, you went
to Evans's house ?— I did.

To whose apartment did you go there ia
ord^r to take away this boxP^To the apart*
meats that I undefstood to '

lass)

^ JBT^A Treaitm.

h4 D. 1798.

[1969

Mr. PImmtw— Do not tell nsivtMit you ud-
denlaiul*

Mr. GofTov.— Do voii know either of tout
aim knowledge, or mm the priaoner Bmns,
or fimn the infoimation of any penon in the
presence of Binns, whoaeapartinent that wa» ?
—I do not. I

Do you know of your own knowledee, or I
from Binnsy to whom that hox bekmgea ?->I
do not

. Nor to whom the apartment belonged in
which it was found ? — ^No.

Had you ever seen Mr. Binns in the apart-
ment in which this box was found?— Never.

Mr. 6arii0v.^I believe your lordship may
relieve your note from what Schaw and Jonea
have eaid.

Benjmnin Hall sworn.— Examined by Mr.

Garrow,

I believeyoulive in Down-street Piccadilly f
—I do.

Do you know the prisoner, Mr. O^nnor ?
•—Yes, I do.

Did he, by the recommendation of any f>er-
son, and whom, apply to you for any article
in which you deal ? — ^Yes.

What business.are you ?— A sadler.

By whom was he recommended to you?—
Sir Francis Burdett.

Have you seen any saddlery arUdes, that
are stated to hav^ been seized at Margate ?-—
I have.

Did you finish the holsters P — ^Yes.

And saddle?— There are two saddles, and I
made two saddles for Mr. O'Connor, in 1796,
these were made the latter end of January
last.

Are they in the packages in which you
packed them f — I oacked them in a case, I
Deheve that to be tne same case.

Did you you put any direction on them ?
—Yes, I directed them to Arthur O^onnor.

You did not direct them to Colonel Mor-
ris ?— No.

Is that your bill ?— Yes.

Be^min UaU aoss-examined by Mr. Dallat.

You said you had made two saddles for
Mr. O'Connor, in 1796?— Yes.

These, I observe, were made the latter en^
of January, 1798?— Yes, and delivered I be-
lieve upon the 3rd of February.

You were denred to be expeditious with
ihem, for the purpose of his taking them with
bim?— Yes.

Benfomn Hall cross-examined by
Bir. Ferguttom*

Are those hunting saddles?— Yes.

Is it not a common thing to make holsters
for nersons that are not military men?—
We oo frequently.

You saw the pistols that werewiHithemF
—Yes,

niey are not military pistols ?-^No.

Mr. 0«rre«.i--Wt might call other wi^

nesses to prove the hats and other articles
furnished for Mr. OXlkxnnor, but it is hardly
necessary, but I will call one more.

Mr. Justice JBu^Jcr.— Is the direction upon
them which you put there?

Mr. Gamw.-*No, that is taken off.

OkvoU 5rroii^ sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Garrow.

You are foreman to Messrs. Muoys and
Davies, hatters in St James's-street f — ^Yes.

Have you seen those hats which have been
represented to have been seized at Margate?
—I have.

Were they furnished by your house, and
for whom ?— Yes, for Mr. O'Connor.

Were the packages in which they are now^
the packages in which they were sent from
your house ?— I think they are.

You did not put any address to colonel
Monris ?— No, I aid not know any such person.

Mr. (/Gaafior.-^This was not an unusual
order, you have furnished me before with as
many as this, at a time?— We have.

Mr. O^Cannor.'-Tyo you recoiled how many ^
you furnished me with the last time?— in
September, 1796, you had three or four hats.

Mr. OGonaor.— Had I not a hhxk cockade
the same as that; was not it a military hat ?
—The last cocked hat you had was covered
with silk oil skin*
And a military hat?-- Yes, it was.
Mr. Justice Xmrreiice.— Do you say these
are the packages that you put them in?— I
think they are.

John Revett called in agun.

Mr. Oorrov.— Look at this printed paper,
upon which you have put your name, di4,

rHi find that upon the prisoner O'Coigly ?—
found that upon the person of the pnsoner

OtJoigly.

Mr. Garrow^-This paper imports to be
^ The Dedaration, Resolutions, and Consti-
tution of the Societies of United Irishmen.'^
We do not wish to tniuble the Court with
hearing the Deckuration read : we only pro-
pose to read the Constitution, the Test, and
the names of the several committees which
follow. _

Mr. Pikm^r.— We shall desire to have
some other parts of it read.

Mr. GarroViT-Then we will have the whole

of it read.

Mr. P/awer.— There are comnuttees form-
ed in eveiy district, comprehending all the
different inhabitants of the different i>laces ;
I wish to have it understood, that if Mr,
O'Connor had been a member, from the ex-
tent of the plan, it must be generally known.

Mr. (/Cofiffior^— I wish to have it read, that
the jury may see how impossible it was for
me to bekng to a soqety of that kind with-
out being £tected, espeoally after the s^-
zures which have been made in Ireland^ I,
as one» should wish to have it read«

ISfff] " S8 GEbAbli HL Trial tfO'(ki^}/^ ffCmmdt and^dhen [1S8S

[It WB8 read.]
^ Jhe DSCL4BA.TI0K, Kis5oLT7TroirSy and Coir-

" 8TItUTK)M of the SoCIETItS Of UviTBD.
** iBISHMElf.

^ DECLA.KATIOK AND KBaOLVTIOVS.

** IN the present great £ra of Reform,
'' when unjust Governments are fallinjg
** in every (Quarter of Europe; when Reh-
** ffious Persecution u compeUed to abjure
'^ner Tyranny over Conscience; when the
'' Rights of Men are ascertained in Theory,
'^ and Uiat Theory substantiated by practice ;
** when Antiquity can nb lon^r defend absurd
*^ and oppressive Forms, against tiie common
** sense and common Interesta of Mankind,
^' when all eovemments are acknowledged to
** originate from the People, and to be so far
** oolv obligatory, aa they proteet their Rights
^ and promote their Weliat« ;— We think it
^ our Dutv, as Irishmen, to come forward, and
'* state what we feel to be our heavy Griev-
'^ ance, and what we know to be its effectual
^Renedy.

f'WE HAVE NO NATIONAL GO-
<< V£RNMENT.~.We are ruled by English-
^men, ami the ServftmU of Englishmen,
^ whose object is the Interest of another
*^ Country; whose Instniment is Corruption,
** and whose Strength is the Weakness of
^ IRELAND ; and these Men have the
** whole of the Power and Patronace of the
^ Country, as Means to aeduce and subdue
** the Honesty of her Representatives in the
** I^islature. Such extrinsic Power, acting
** with uniform FOh:es inB Dh-ectiOn too fre-
** qticntly opposite to the true Line of our ob*
<* vioas interests, ca:n be resisted with effect
«< solely by the Unanimi^, Decition, uid Spirit
^ of the Peop£s.~ Quanlies which maybe
<• exerted most legally, constitutionally, and.
** efficaciouslyi-bv that great measure, essen-'
*tial to the Prospenty and firceaom of
<' Ireland-^4^ EQUAL R^PRESENTA-
** TION OF ALL THE PEOPLE IN
"^ PARLUMEJSfT.

^ We do not here mention as Grievances,
^ the Rejection of a Place Bill, of a Pension
* Bill, of a Responsibility Bill; the Sale of
2 Peerages in one House, the Corruption
** publicly avowed in the other, not the noto-
** rious Infamy of Borough Traffic hi both ;
** not that we are insensible of their Enormity,
** but that we consider them as but Symp-
** toms of tfcat mortal disease which corrodes
•' the Vitals of our .Corttltution, and leaves
" to the People, in their own GotemmenL
« but the Shadow of a Name. ^

*' Impressed with theSe 8rtit!we*nts, w^
•« have agreed to form at^ association, to 'be
^ called TBE SOCHTF Of tVllfED
" IRISHMEN ; and Wedo ple^e oufseKres
** to oar Country, and ttmtaaUy to each bther,
II r^KT^ ^^^^ steadily Support and enilfeavbur
« by all due Means to caity Into efect the fol-
'* lowing RfiSdlntiolOj^

** FraMwReMv«d*^n«t fJW vd|f Hi ^ Eiig-

** Uih influence in, the Oevernmeni of ikie
'^C&i^ryii «» greor, at lorv^tr^o tjordial
•*' Union amoR^ avl ma Moi»tii o» tafe»
** LAND, to matntttin thai balance ^kSch d
■^ euential to the pretertatian if ckt Liber^
*^ tiu.and ext^ntion cfomr Commerce.

<< Second— TAoe the %ole Conttiiutumal Mode
" by which ihi$ Influenee can be oppoeed, tt
** Ima complete and radical Reform of the
** Keprescntatian of the People in Perlia-'
«* merU.

" *tBiRD— I^oi no Reform ispraeHeabie, efi-'
** cacioui, or jutt^ which mall not indude
** Irishmen ofeoery Religious Ptmuuion.

*\ Satisfied, as we are, that the inteatme Di-
** visions among Irishmen, have too oAen
'^ leiven encouragement and Impunity, to pro-
*' nigate, audacious, and corrupt Adminbtra-
** tionsp in Measures^ which, but for these
^^ divisions, they durst not have attempted —
** We subinit our resolutions to the Nation,
** as the Basis of our Political Faith.

** We have gone to what we conceive to be
** the Root of the evil— we tiave stated what
'< we conceive to be the JRcaiei^. With a
'' Parliament thus Reformed, every thinp is
^ easy — without it nothing can be done : And
** we do call on, and most earnestly eahorl
** our Countrymen in general^ to follow our
** example, and to form nmilar Societies in
^ every quarter of the Kingdom, for the pn>«
'< motion of Constitutional Knowledge, the
" abolition of Bigotrv in Religion and Po\i-
'< tics, and the eooal mstribution of the Rights
''ofManthrougnout all Sects andDenomi-
" nations of Irishmen. The People, when
« thus collected, will feel their own Weiaht,
** and secure that Power which Theocy has
'' already admitted as their portion, and to
^ which, if th^ be not aroused bj their pre-
'' sent Provocations to vindicate it, they de*
'' serve to forfeit their pretensions for ever.

" THE Societies of Uvitbh Ieisbmsh, v-
** dentiy desiring, that the mioved^ tmAtreiL
^ and htmett part of the Cottmani^, rixaiw
** become one great Society of UiriTaD lana*
** MEN, are of Opinion, that a general Code
^ of Regolations is absolutely necessaiy to
" accomplish that important end. For this
" Ijurpose, they have, afier mature deliber»-
*< tion, adopted the foUowkkg Canstituiion and
** Test^ the adoption of which is neceimy te
" such Societies as wish to ente^ into con»-
^ rounication and correspondence with those
^ already established.

** It is earnestly fectumntonded to Societies
^ to establish. a BiAaoviAi^ CoMMmaa in a
f^ -central part of each Qarooy, or such otber
i' district as may: bp Ihougbi Jiroper, for the
** purpose'of corresponding with aadi otbes^
V my. Demitation or glharwise. The Sodatiea
" of each Barony to be numbered acoowins
^ to seniority, and the iMimber of Msmby t*
<< be MMusqi to the ^ecreiaiy of Iho ^Miial
** Committee quarteriy.

1960]

J^ £%A ruMfoir.

A. D. 1796.

[1810

«< New flDeidtes iIiodM IM QilaliliBlKd liy s
^.demitiilioB iiom so old om, who are to Me
*^ aSeciMary appointed and attested according
*< to the fiteeretaries' Teal.

«<Tbe blankft in the Constitutioiial Code
^ are to be filled agreeably to the opinion and
<^ coBTenience of each Society/'

^ COM MITU TlOV*

(Mat THIS Society is consUtiAed for ihe
<< piirposeof forwarding a brotherhood of Af-
<< fection, a communion of ^ghts. and an
^ union of Power among Irishmen of

<« £r£AF RELIGIOUS PERSUASIONt

^ and thereby to obtain a complete Eeform in
** the Leeislature, founded on the Principles
^ of Civil, Political, and Reli^ous Liberty.

** Sd. The Members of this Society shall
^ either \ft ordinary or honorary, and shall
** not be limited to any description of Men,
^ but to extend to all persons who may be
** deemed eligible.

«" M. Every Candidate for adnussibn ittto
^ this Society, shall be proposed by one Mem-
** ber, and seconded by another, both of whom
** shall TOQch for fab Character and Princi-
** pies, and whose name shall be entered in
** tfae bookft^ the Socie^. The Candidate
<< to be balkmed for on the Sodet/s snbse-
** qnent Meetins;, and if one of the

** beans be black, he shall stand rejected.

** 4th. As a Fund is necessary, the better to
^ carr^ into effect Che Purposes of this Asso-
** ciation, each Member on his ladmission,
*^ shall pay to the Society the sum of
«* and

** per Month while be sha)l con-

^ tinue a Member.

** 5th. The Officers of this Society shall be
^ a Secretary and fl^easuiei, who shall be ap-
^ pointed by ballot every three Months, viz.
** on every first Meeting in November, Fe-
« bruary. May, and AuguiBt

" atb. This Society, in manner aforesaid,
** shall appoint two Members, who, with the
** Seoretaiy, shall act for the Societv in a Ba-
** j-oniail Committee, which Memoen jhall
** receive on

f'each night of their attendance on said
'* CoromiUee.

** 7th. This Society shall, In manner afore*
** said, appoint Members, who,

^ with the Treasurer, Aidl Torm a Committee
^ of Finance^ &c

'** 8th. At the request of either Commit-
** t^s, ot'anv MemVen signing

■> h E^Ation, the Secretary, or if heslku
'< be a!raent, ihe Treasuret, snail call an extra
«* Mf eUngof the Society.

** 9tti. This Society ahall mec^ iik drdliiary
<< every second evenihg,

* at <M66k, HheTfeMtnt S

**^ cAoseu by % mijority df the Mettbers
••jje^ht^ oTwhom^fiaU

i)fe a qwMnu*

^'lOth. Every rsspect and deferenee shall
'^be psid to the Chatrraan. Ob his rising
** from his sesH, and taking off his hat, there
** shall be silence, and the Members seated,
*< He shall be Judge of Order and Propriety ;
** shall grant leave of Absence at pleasure ;
^ shall not enter into Debate. If any Mem-
** ber behave improperijTf ^ i^ empowered to
** direct an apology, or if reiiractoty^ fine ium
** in any sum not exceeding
** and on refusal to do as di-

'' rected, he shdl therefore be expelled the
** Society for

^ 11th. No Member shall speak more tiuui
** twice to one question^ wttnout leave from
*' the Chairman.

^ isth. Every Person elected a Member of
** this Society, whether ordinary or honorary,
^ shaU, previous to his Admission, tak^ the
" fi>llowiiig Teie, in a sepaiate Apartment, in
^ the presence of the persons who propped
^ and seconded hkn, and one Member «p-
** pointed by the Chautnan; or in case of
** Absenoe of one of the two persons, the
'< Chairman shall appoint another Mem%erto
** act for the Absentee ; «fter which the new
"< Member ehall be biou|^t Into the body of
" the Society, and there take the Ibe in the
<<usuallbnii»

<< IN ihe awful Praenee of GOD,

'' J, A.B. do volUHiarify declartf that I will
** pertevtre im tndeavoitring 4o forma Bro-
^ therhood of Affection among Irjsiiv£N qf
" every Reiigioui Fertuasion, and that Iwul
** alto_penevere in my Endeaoourt to obtain
^ an Equal, Full, and Adequate Beprammo'
** tion ^all the People ^ Ireland. I dafur^
** tketdedmre, that neither Hopee, FeorifRa*
** warde^ or Puniehmentt^ Ml oner induce
** me, direethf or indkeetfy^ to inform on or
^gioe Etidenee against aajf tiemhor or
**Mamber$ of tine or nmilar SodeUte, for
** any Act or Emoatom cf ihmre, dona or
** made adleetimfy or imtividnallyf moroai
^ ofihk Seetely, in pnnuanee ^ lAeiqwHI
<< ^ihu Obligation,

^ l3th. A irietnber eC ittiy either aeknow-
** lodged Society being introduced to this 8o^
*• ciety by a Member, shall, upon producing i
** Certificate, signed by the Seeretaiy, and
^ sealed with the seal of the Socwty to wfiicH
** he m^ belong, and taking the foregoing
« Test, be adn^ttod to attend the Sittings of
•^thto Society.

^ 14th. No Member shall haiffe k Certifi-
" qtte but by applying to the Comiliitlee,
<< who sihan not Mlit n unless lAie Member
^ is leaving his mee eff residence, which Cef-
'< tifitate shall be lodged with the Secretary
^ on fals retora.

** )5tb. Wben this Society shall amount t6
« the nvlniber of ttdrtV^ Members, it stiall
« be /qoelly dMded by let;* tteit Is, tht

*<'«Sedleiieski'eoaiilry')plaoMi6dMde as

^ may best suit their kx:al situation.

1371] 58 GEORGE IIL

MifffCoig^^&CaHnafandMm [197!?

'<MiHnef of all tht Members •hall bepot
^ into a hat or boi, the Secretaiy or. Trea-
^ forer shall draw out eishleen inaividuallyy
** which ei^leen shall oe considered the
** Senior Society, and the remaining eighteen
<f the Junior, who shall apply to the Baronial
*^ Commitleey through the Delegates of the
*' Senior Societv, for a number, and that this
** division shall take place only in the Months
** of October, Januaiy, April, and July. The
** fund shall also be e<^uaUy divided.
« ** 16th. That no Soaety shall be recognised
« by any Conmiittee, unless approving of, and
^ taking the Test, and amountiog in number
** to seven Members.''

^ ORDsa OF Bimiirsse at iiEBnNos*

^ let New Members read Declaration and
^ Test, during which Subscriptions to be col-
'Elected.

^ 8d. New Biembers take the Test, all
'^ Members standing and uncovered. .

'^dd. Minutes of nrecedlng Meeting read.

** 4th. Reports or Committees received.

** 6th. Communications called for.

^ 6th. Candidates Ballotted for.

^ 7th. Candidates proposed.

** 8th. Motions made and ~

** 9th. Phu» and time of neit Meetmg ap-
pomted/'^

" eonsriTVTioir or coiciiittees,

** AS ADOPTSd THE TEHTO OF HAT.
^ BAEONXAL COlllCITTEES.

*' 1st WHEN any Barony or other District
"^ shall contain three or more Societies, three
** persons from each shall be elected by Bal-
''lot, conformable to the sixth Article, to
''form a Baronial Committee (for three
** Months); their Names to be returned td
" the Secretary of the Senior Society, who
** shall reouest a Deputation from the nearest
** Bavonial Committee to oons^tute a Com-
^ mitted for the said Barony or other Dis-
«trict

"* Sd. When any Baronv or District shall
« contain eight Societies, they may form ano-
'< ther Committee, to be called the Second
«< Committee of said Barony or District, pro«
** vided each contains three or more Socio-
"ties,

** dd« Baronial Committees shaU receive
'^ Delegates from Societies of a contiguous
** Barony, provided said Barony do not oon-
^ tain three Societies.

** 4th. That the Baronial Committee shall
''correspond with Sodeties or Individuals,
" who have subscribed the DeclaraUon and
** taken the Test of the present associated So-
^cietieSk

" 5th. That aU Questions shaU be deter-
" rained by a Majority of the Members pre-
"sent •

"«th. That the Baronial Committee be-

"^mg legnlarly siwimonifd, the ooa-tfaifd of
" its Members shall be deemed a Quomm,
" and capable of prpcewMng to businesa.

'*7th. That any Business origmatiiMr in any
'< individual Society, shaU at the ins&nee of
" such Society's Delegates, be by tha Baio-
" nial Committee laid before the other aocie-
'^ties.''

u

eOOITTT COICICITTBES.

^ Ist WHEN any CounQr shall cootaiB
"three or more Baironial Committees^ two
" Persons shall be elected by Ballot from each
" Baronial Committee to form a County Com-
" mittee (for three months.)

^ 8d. County Committees shall receive De»
" legates from Baronial Committees of adja*
" cent Counties, if said Counties do not con*
" tain three Baronial Committees.''

" PEOVIBCIAL COKMITTEES.

" 1st. When .two or Itaore Counties shall
^ have County Committees, three Persons
"shall be elected by Ballot from each to
" form a Provincial Conmiittee (for three
" Months).

" Sd. Delegates from County Committees
" in other Provinces will be received, if such
" Provinces do not contain two County
" mittecs.'*

" V ATIOVAL COM HiTTEB.

''THAT when two Provincial Committees
" are formed,they shall elect five Personsfiom
" each by Ballot to form a National Conk*
« mittee.''

Mrt

" 1^ Societies first Meetings in November,
"Februarv, May^ and August, to be on or
" before the 5th. Baronial Coramitteea on or
" before the 8th. County Committeea on or
" before the 85th of the above months.

" Baronial, County, and Proving Gooa-
" mittees, shall meet at least once in efery
" Month, and report to their Constituents.

" Names of Committee*men should not be
" known by any Person but by those who
" elect them.

"TEST.

" For Secretaries of Sodeties or Commiiiwu

" IN the awfol presence of God,
" I» J[. B. do voluntarily declare. tbM aa kM^
" as I shall hold the Office ot Seovtaiy to
"this I will to the utmost

"of my Abilities faithful^ dischaige the
" Duties thereof.
^ That all Papers or Documents recdved by
" me, as Se!cretaiy, I will in aafotjf kseop;
" I noli not give any of them, or any Copgr
" or Copies of them to any Petioiior

ISTS]

fur High Tf9afMi.

A. D. 1796.

[1S74

*«aQiia,MeiDlmrf|Orotlicn,1wtbT a Vott
«ofthU ; and thall will

^ at the expiratloo of my Secietaryshipy de*
^ liver up to this all

«' mchPapatsasmay be then in my posses-

sion.

»>

« SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN,
"of

^ I HEREBY certif;^, that A. B. has been
** duly elected, and having taken the Test pro-
vided in the Constitution, has been admit-
^ ted a Member of this Society.''

Set.

u

John Revett cross-examined by Mr.
FergustoH.

Besides this printed paper and the passport,
did yon find any other printed paper upon
Mr. OXlloi^W? — I found a number of printed

Cpers which I marked at the duke of Port*
ad's office.

Are they here f

Mr. GfliTov.— We are ready tohand them
over te vou; if you wish to have them read,
we can have no objection.

Mr. Ferguutm, — ^I should wish to have the
titles of them read if you please.

Mr: P/»iMr.*^erely to show that this
paper was among a number of other printed
paners.

Mr. Gomiw.— We do not know of any
other printed paper but a French newspaper
which I hold in my hand dated the third and
fourth of September« 1799.

Mr. F<rgitti0ii^-«l>onotyou recollect seeing
the duke of Richmond'a letter to colond
Sharman?— No.

And Mr. Pitt's speeth at the Thatched
House ?^No.

Mr. Henry Maryen sworn.— Examined by

Mr. Garrow.

Look at these four .manuscript P&pcrs
"Where did you find them P— In Mr. O'Con*
nor*t house at Belfast, my name is upon each
of them.

Mr. Onrrow.— We do not propose to read
these it is mark enonah for you, that there
are four papers signed Henry Blaryon, found
at Mr. O'Connor's house in Belfast.

Mr. P/MNer.— Wbendid you find these f—
On the 7th of Janoaty, 1797.

Thatwasbefore Mr. OXIonnor was appre-
bendecif— No, some Ume after he was taken
tip in Dublin.

Was it while he was in confinement that
50U went to his house at Belfast, and seiied
all his fNipers, and these among tiie restf^
I think it was while he was in oonfinamenl*

Amongst his papers you found theseP—
Tcf.

You are a constahle are are not youl^
No, I am one of his majesty's messengers.

The papers you seised, you showed to the
Secretary of state in Ireland, in January 1797P
— ^Yes, but at the time I took them I marked
them.

Do you know when Mr. O'Connor was
let out of prison ? — I do not recoUect.

Mr. (y Connor. — Do not you know that I was
aconsklerabletimein prison after these had
been taken, and had been put in the custody
of the Irish government? — Yes, certainly.

Mr. CGorniorK-^Do not you believe I was
six months in prison subsequentf— Yes.

Mr. O'Cofiaor.— Did you not hear I was
dischaiged after six months imprisonment
without any prosecution ? — ^I understood you
were discharged by giving bail.

Mr. O'Connor. — ^You never heard that there
had|been any prosecution f— No, I never heard
that you were prosecuted.

Mr. O'Coanor— Did you hear that that
was an uncoinmonly severe confinement— to*
tally solitary }

Mr. Gamow.—Wecannot hear the witness's
judgment upon the severity or the propriety of
the confinement.

Mr. O'Cimii0r.**Has it escaped your know-
lege that I was in that state in dose confine-
ment ?--~-I have said that.

Mr. O'CoaiMT.— That I was not allowed to
have a single person to come near me, did
you not know that P — ^I do not know it

Mr. O^Cannor^ — ^And pen ink and p^[Mr
denied me ?— I never heara that it was so.

Mr. JKoffiey Oenerdl^ — ^Here I shall close
the case on the part of the Crown.

Mr Justice Btt/2er.— Do the prisoners choosjS
to say any thing themselves, and will they do
it before or aAer their counsel sp«dc P

Mr. DoiUaf .-—Tour lordship will see that
the mode which is. adopted, is in order to
save the time of the Court. After the op^ii-
ing of the case of Mr. O'Connor, and Mr.
O'Coigty for whom Mr. Plumer is of counsel,
the gentlemen with me will state the respec*
tive cases of fiinns, of Allen, and of Leary. —
We shall then call our witnesses, and I shall
then sum up the whole of the evidence, so
that the Court will only be troubled with
one sp^ch for each of the prisoners.

[It being now near Id o'clock at niflbt, the
officers were sworn in the usual form to
attend the jury, who all slept in one laige
room -« and the Court adjourned to
8 o'clock the next morning.]

t

On Tuesday, May the 39nd, 1798, the
Court met, pursuant to wtiournm^nt, at eight
o'clock in the morning.

Pmeia.— The right boa. lord Bomney ; the
hon. Mr. Justice Bailer; the boa. Mr.
Justice Heath ; the hon. Mr. Justice Ltw*
rence ; aiyd Mr. Segeaiit Shepherd.

1375] S8 QEORQE IIL Trial offfCoi^^. aCctam and Uhen [IS76

The prlaonen were let to the bar.

Mr. PUtmer^r^May it please your Lord-
ehipsy and Oeotleinen of tne Juiy ; I addreis
you upop thi9 occavion witti a degree of
anxiety which I never felt before. When I
consider what is to be the re9ult of this day*s
deliberation^and what important consequences
are involved in your decision; when I con-
sidef^he nature of the accusation against
these ^nfort^nate eenllemen. and under what
circumstances it is t>rought mrward, itisim-
po^^le, gentlemen, that I should not address
you wkh the deepest anuety* Various diffi-
culties present: themadvea m the way of the
defetKy^— the nature of the charge, interest-
ing SU9 it n^turaJly must be to every English-
man, and affording ^eat danger of confounds
sng the aocujsed with the accusation,— >the
tempef of th® time8,-*the place where this
subject is made matter of inquiry,— < the
priyudices |hat have been attemptfid to be
raised agaips;! the unfortunate gentlemen who
are now standing before you, not on the part
of the prosecution or by any body concerned
in it. but by wicked and foolish men, who are
weak enough to suppose tfuU the miblic
safe^ is interested in the conviction ot these
pen, right or wropg, let the evidence be what
it may y— and let me add, gentlemen, my
fears, that it is impq^sible that you can live
in the world, and live in this county in paiii-
cular, e0rpose<L as from Us situation it is, to
the threatened invasion of the enemy, with-
out, in SQOjB respects, feeling thai, these
topics have been too suocessfolly vr$fi. But
gentlemen, I jtely xk^t ^QM af e M impressed
with the importance of the duty which be-
longs to you, and I am tiiorougfaly convinced
will euffer no endeavours of any kind to warp
your judgments, or prevent these men from
receiving at your han A, (which is all thev ask),
a fair ana impartial trial; that you will hear
thek case, as they liave a right to have it
heard, in this stage of the proceeding, with
every presumption of their innocence, tOl the
contrary is established by a verdict of a Britiah

Clenflemen, that the public have m great
interest that crimes should not pass ^th im-
mimty, and ^at this crfane in partiddar. the
niehest that a suljectcan coihmit, should in
alfcaees, meet with the punistoieat it justly
merits, I do not in th^ least tnmu to contro-
vert; hut gentlemen, I am persuaded it will
hp equally admitted on the other side^ that
there is an inteiest wWch;liie public Jbave in
common even with these unfortunate persons,
a much greater and more important interest
that those who are under accusatiop should
have a fair triaL and should not be convicted
imless dieir gum be established by clear and
indisputable evidence, leaving no reasoniEible
ipoundAf ;douht upon the mind of the jury;
wax .1 Jay, is a mueh hraader and a «Qore
facmanont intef eat lUtt ai^ the public can
have uiLdha oataaadiQii of aiiy:uidmdiial,

where tfacf inquii^ eonoernai m Ib tha^prment
caae, raeie question of &ct, not involving, in
any way of considering the subject, any gene-
ral principles of law ; because,, in the safety
of these men, if tbey^ ave innocent, that of
every individual is imolicated; the dtaincter
and honour of British justice is at stake,
which is deeply violated not only if in any in-
stance an innocent man should be convicted,
but also if a person should be convicted w^h-
out a fair trial, without an unprejudiced con-
sideration of the subject, and where the evi-
dence does not clearW and ftdrlv make out
the proof of the specific charge allied against
him, so as to leave no doubt vfoa tlie mind
of the jury.

Gentlemen, I am persuaded you .gp along
with me in adopting these general principles,
which I am sure, I fed in common with the
gentlemen concerned on the other side, and
unquestionably with the Court, that these
are the principles, upon which every indivi-
dual in a British court of justice stanids upon
the issue for his life or death, entitled to evwy
presumption in bis favour, entitled to have
the cbaree against him asade put clearly and
indisputably, before he can be sut^ected to
the consequences of a conviction.

Gentksneo; there is one sul^ject in the
outset of this busiaesi, from which I am
anxious to deliver your minds, and the minds
of all who hear me. I am not inelractad on
the part of the accused, ia ODjf eespiGft, t»
complain upon that suIqm^ wmeh wasinide
the first topic of the. inlroductioii in iny
learned friend's address to you. He was
anxious to shew that he was called npen by
imperious necessity (aal tlunk he stated) to
bring .this charge undec the oonsidemtion of
the country, in order that a raatier might be
fiiUyiovestiaalei, in which the public intORst
was sn deeply ooncamed.

Gentlemen. I freely admit, whatewr he
the issue of this day's decision, and I tnisl it
will be favourable, I am not entitled t» com-
plain that this case has been made the subject
of public inqtnry : on the part of the defend-
ants I rqoice that it has been so, and that
that inquiry has been conducted with the
industry empbyed by the piosecntor, bring-
ing out by parol or written evidence, every
circumstance that could bear upon the sub-
ject; unquestionably those concerned for the
crown were called upon to act by tha-auspi-
cioua ciicuBBStanoes, in which, I admit, these
persons were Ibund ; I am not attemptiiffi to
conceal ,tbe impiudent and impmper^onaiict
of some of them^ a conduct; however, very
naturally aceeunted for, without aiy inference
0i guilt, /from ithe alana and anprabeaaiDn of
persons taken up on a charge like this; hut
unftler such dioumstansfs slndovbtedly it did
become necessary that the matter muld be
jHibAidor inquired into aaii Ptobad to tlia
helilQm; but gentlemen, aitet the aubjast Ins
iMenfiiilvinquiied into^a^ gfovimebad
the satismction of knowmg that nothing has

1377]

for High TftuMU

A. D. 1798.

[1378

been concealed, that the prosecutors have
been in posaesuon for weeks and nionthsy of
all the means of discovery ; that they have
brought before you, with proper and laudable
induBtry^ parol witnesses, not less I think
than forty in number, that every scmp of
paper to which they have got access, has
Deen produced, every quarter of this and ano-
ther kingdom ransacked, properly ransacked,
to adduce every piece of evidence and every
witness that could be brought : I trust gen-
tlemen, I am warranted in saying, after all
this, you are not to add any prejudices, pre-
sumptions, or supnositions, beyond the fiur
result of what is before you, or to suspect
that there is any thing still remaining behmd ;
and still less if, in tl£ result of all that you
have heard, there is nothing of that clear and
convincing evidence, necessary to substan-
tiate a chtfge like the present, that you ought
to convict upon the ground of any latent sus-

g'cion, or because some matters are not satis-
ctorily cleared up. Some doubts remaining
upon parts of the case, and upon some docu-
ments produced by the prosecutor, which the
prisoners may not be, able fully to eiplain;
give me leave to observe, that it is not in-
cumbent upon the prisoners, in any case, to
explain on their put, it is incumbent upon
the prosecutor to prove; if, in the result, it'
should renuun a matter of doubt, matter of
mystery, as my learned friend stated, it is not
incumtKent upon the prisoners, at the peril of
conviction, to clear it up and explain it, and
it would be very hard if it were so. If the
case remains doubtful, unexplained, and mys-
terious, you are not in a doubtful, in an un-
explained, and in a mysterious case to convict;
but tile prisoners are entitled to the presump-
tion in their favour that they are mnocent,
unless the contrary be estabhshed by proof;
therefore, gentlemen, in every part of the
case, where there b a defect of proof on the
part of the prosecution, I rely upon the gene-
ral presumption, that the law makes in favour
of innocence, and on the right which everv
defendant has, in every case, to expect fiiU
proof on the part of the prosecution, before
ne shall be subject to condemnation.

Oentlemen, I do not stand here to depre-
cate your vengeance, if the fact be clearly
established ; I am not instructed on the part
of the prisoners, to palliate this dreadful
offence; or to say that any person, who has
been guilty of it, does not justly merit death
in its most dreadful form ; but conscious of
their innocence, called upon here, stransers
in the county, the natives of another kingdom,
at a distance, and ftigitives unfortunately
from that country, and in the act of becoming
so from this; still they know, with what
confidence they roav rely upon the integrity
of a British jiuy ; that you will not suffer any
tiqjust prejudices to operate against them;
that you will weigh all the circumstances
ftiriy ; and that if in the result, you find all
the circumstances, that naturally have pro-

VOL.XXVI. .

dueed suspicion against them, are either
cleared up, or that in the result, they are not
fiuriy imputable to them, to the extent
pressed ; they are perfectly convinced, gen-
tlemen you will make a just and true deli-
verance of them. They have put their all
upon the stake of this day's cvenf; they
have not attempted to split or divide the
case ; they have not availed themselves of
of Uieir right of separate challenge ; but they
have all come before vou at once : they have
committed into your hands altogether, their
lives, and every thing that is dear to each of
them; because they are perfectly assured,
that whenever a British jury have to consider
a case like the present, they will be governed
by all those principles which form the safe-
guards of the subject; and which, for the
sake of all, the law, in everv case, tlirows
around the person who stands in the awful
situation of these prisoners.

Gentlemen, in tne duty I have to discharge,
punful and distressing as it is, it is a great
consolation to me to refiect, that the case I
have to discuss, involves no difficulty in point
of law. I shall not dispute any one principle
of law contended for on the other side ; and
I trust I shall not state any that can ad-
mit of the smallest doubt : the law 1$ perfectly
well settled, and it is not my duty, and cer-
tainlv not my iofolination, to attempt to unset-
tle tnose solid principles, and those decisions
which have for aees established what is the
law applic^le to tne present subject.

Oentlemen, it is also some consolation to
me, though appearing for one gentleman in
particular, who stands in a very imfortunale
predicament indeed^ because he is in some
respect placed in this situation by a circum-
stance that deprives him of the assistance of
the greatest talents that might have been
exerted on his behalf; but it is I say, a conso-
lation to know, that the present case is not one
of that nature which calls for the exertion of
those great talents which have beep success-
fully exerted upon other occasions. The pre-
sent is a plain simple question of fact. The
task, therefore, is of an humbler nature, and
better suited to the talents of him who ad-
dresses you.

In the discharge of this duty, I shall not at«
tempt to have recourse to any extratieous
topics. I shall endeavour to simplify the sub-
ject, and to present it unentanglcd before you.
I shall consider the natute of the charge
itselfj^the evidence which is necessary to sup-
port it, the principles by which an inouiry of
this kind must be conducted, and the evi-
dence that has been adduced on the part of
the prosecution, in support of it ; and, gentle-
men, it is a great satisfaction to me to reflect,
that although every defect of mine, will be .
supplied by those who follow me; yet, that
in tne present, and in all similar cases, the
aid of counsel is not necessary. Those who
stand under accusation, have better counsel
to assist and stand by^ them^ in the perilous
. 4 T

137d] S8 GEORGE UL Trial ^CfCdi^y, (yC(Mii&r and otkers [1380

day of trial; they have the Court for their
counsel ; they have the great security and pro-
tection of all the gpneraiprinciples of the law :
those sacred principles which are so well de-
scribed by a noble and learned judgp, in an ad-
dress to the House of Lords, opon an occasion
like the present. I mean lord Nottingham, at
the trial of lord Comwallis. **X know your lord-
ships (said he) will weigh the fact with ^
its circumstances from which it is to receive
its proper doom. Your lordships are too just
to ]et pity make an abatement for the cnme,
and too wise to suffer rhetoric to make any
improvement of it. This only will be n^ces-
SBiy to be observed by all your lordships, that
the fouler the crime is, the clearer and the
plainer ought tlie proof of it io be. There is
no other good reason can be given tfhy the
law refuses to allow the prisoner at the bar
counsel, in matter of fltct (which was the
ease at that time) when life its concerned, but
only this ;"•— mark gentlemen what is stated
by this great judge: — ** because the evidence
by which he is condemned, ought to be «o
very evident, and so pl^n, that all the oouo-
sel m the world should not be able to answer
it." Gentlemen, remember that .principle,
and carry it alone, with you in the present
incjuiry. You wiU hereafter, apply it to the
evidence which has been adduced on the part
of the prosecution, ^nd see' whether it in any
respect, comes up to the criterion, and the test
which this great and excellent judge has laid
down upon the subject.

Gentlemen, in examining the charge^ .it is
of the greatest importance^ that you jsnould
carefully distinguish .wlvit is the precise na-
ture of the charge, what is thf gist of it, what
his that is necessary to be. proved, without
which, the charge must fall to the ground ;
and to separate what is mere matter of form,
which must accompany the charge, from that
which constitutes the principal nature of the
accusation. In an indictmentfor treason, the
nature of the charge is, the imagination and
thought of the mind; thereiu consists the
tuiU, and all the rest is mere matter .of evi-
aence, to prove it; but 9uch an inouiry is
obviously liable to great difficulty in the jpro-
se<hition of jt. And on the one hand, where
the eafety of the public is protected by making
the mere imagination and thought, volunias
prafactOy in this instance, as it is not in any
other, penal, in the extreme, the law on. the
other hand has protected the subject, by re-
quiring that he should not be convicte;^ with-
out clear proof of some, overt act, manifesting
that intention, and showing that it is actually
begun to be carried into executipn, and gen-
tlemen, here you will recollect what are tl^e
words pf the statute, upon which the present
indictment is grounded.

The sutute of Edward 3rd, the grea,t sta-
tute that has fixed the Hiw of treason for four
ceotunes and a half, in that part which ap-
plies to the present inquiry, states that

any person who is adherent to the king's

enemies in his realm, 'giving to them aid and
^infort in the realm, or elsewhere and
thereof ^-->now attend to these words gende*
men— ^ and thereof be provahfy attainted of
open deed by people of their condition." It is
pot enou£h that there should be an iifta^ina-
.tion to adhere to the king's enemies ; if it
rests merely in as abstract thought of the
mind, never carried or attempted to be carried
into execution (for I admit tliat if a single act
has been done towards carrying into execution
the intent, that is sufficient; it is not neces-
sary it should by actually perpetrated) but if
^here be po act done, consequent upon it, or
if the act that is done, is not most clearly re-
ferable to that intent, and proving it, ir the
prisoners are not provably attainted of opea
deed by people of the|r condition) then, gen-
tlemen, they are not euilty to the extent of
this indictment They are not to -be con-
victed of being adherent to the king's ene-
mies in the realm, unless they be provably
attainted of it of open deed.

Npw^ gentlemen,, remember what is the
construction that has been put upon this
statute : I shall be^ you to attend to the words
of a great judge, in. commenting upon thi^
jitatutf , which c^ never be too bi&n repeated,
whenever this statute is made the subject of
inquiry. I mean, gentlemen,' the explanation
of it given by my lord Coke : f' By provably^"
says that great judge '* is meant, that it ^
upon direct and manifest proqf not ttpoa com*
jectural presumptions or inferences, or strains
•f wit, but upon aood and suficiinU proof ^—^aA
herein the aavero provably nath a great force,
and sigpifieth a direct plain proo^ which
word the Lords and Comixions,in parliament,
did use ;' for that the offence of treason waa so
heinous, uid was so heavily and severely pu*
nished as none other the like, and thererace
the offender must be provably attainted,
which words are as forcible as upon direct and
manifest prooil^Note, the wora Is not proba-
bly, for then commune argumeHtum mi^t
.have served, but the word is provably be at-
tainted.''

I request, gentlemen, that you would can^
along with you, throughout this inquiry, this
test, this guide, which is to conduct your
judgment in pronouncing upon the evidence
before you. Jlemember it must be direct aii4
maxiifest probf| not upon coi^jecture, or pie-
sumptions, or mferences, or strains of wit. I
tri^t you will find that the prosecutor here
does rely altogether upon cot^ecture and;pi«-
sumptions^ in the main part of the^ chaige I
mean, and not upon direct and manifest pioof
of his charge; mere coiyecture and presuipp-
tions, and inferences, which are not tmy
warranted by the evidence before you.

Gentlemen, I shall be^you likewiaa Io pif
llttehtiqo to what my lord' Hale sayaupai|.t^
subject; he states, "« That, al^oi^ fheodme
^ high treason is the g^teit f lifpe jpywl
ffuth, duty, and human soddtnJIw'JiMi
with It the greatest wad most iSU-dai|CBfi to

1381J

J6r High Treason.

A. D. 1798*

[1383

t^e eoverQinenty peace, and happiness of a
kingdom or state, and tberefore is deservedly
branded with the highest ignominy, and sub-
jected to the greatest penalties that the laws'
can inflict — It appears first how necessary it
was that there snould be some known, fixed,
apd settled boundary for this great crime of
treason, and of what great importance the
atatute of 95 Edward Sro, was inonler to that
end. Secondly, how dangerous it is to depart
from the letter of tbsrt statute, and to multiply
and inhance crimes into treason by ambiguous
«ud general words, such as accroaching of
Toyal ix)wer, subverting fiindamentid laws,
and the like — and thirdly, How dangerous it
is by construction and analogy to n^e trea-
"Sons where the letter of the law has not dene
it — for such a method admits of no limits or
^unds, but runs as far and as wide as the
"wit and invention of accusers, and the odious-
fiess and detestation of persons accused, will
-carry men."

Upon these general principles It is that I
conceive this inquiry must be conducted^
ihey are recognized in every trial, they are
ratified upon every occasion by the ^atest
authorities that have ever presideid upon in-
quiries like the present, and no case has been,
«f late years, conducted (to the honour of the
|)resent times I state it) without enjoining
the observance of them on those who are to
decide upon it. If it be necessary that there
should be overt acts proved, to manifest' the
intent,, it is obvious what the nature of thesp
t>vert acts ipu^t be; viz. such as plaihiy evi-
dence the intent charged^ riot acts tndinerept
in themselves, not acts that are equivocal —
not such as are referable to an honest, a just,
and a lawful motive,~-or if they be acte of
thh latter description, that there must be ciciar
•evidence — aiiunde — from other circumstances
— to fasten the particular intent charged, in
'Order that the reason and principle of the law
may be answered. The reason why the law
requires proof of overt adts in high treason, is
■on two accounts.— First, that the intent
fihould be manifest; and next, that it should
have proceeded to the length of being at least
4)egun to be carried into execution.

But if you take an act, that b indiiTerem in
itself, such for instance as the ^ing abroad by
a numberbf persons, and inquire whether that
going abroad be treason or n6t? it is neces-
saiy that it 'shoold be proved to be done with
the intent, and, (pr the purpose charg^; and
the inquiry in that case is not whether the
acts cbarged'tpbe done were done or not, but
'the main eub^ntial point of the inquiry is.
whether they weis'done with the intent add
for the purpose, that is the subjeict of the
charge? There yon find the intent and the
purpose constitutes the principal part of the
charge. The acts may be all admitted to,
have bee,h done, as in the instaBce Ui ques-
tion, that a number of persons did aKogether
^ree to gp abroad, that they did ao tinder
ciroirastaDces lawful or not^ no niaUfer which.

for the purpose of the pre;sent subject,— if the
latter, that accounts for all the circumstances
•f concealment, and endeavours to get secretly
out of the kingdom, but this forms but a small
part of the subject You are to inquire not
simply whether these acts .were done ? not
dmply whether the prisoners treated with
Jeremiah Mowie, and with Foreman and Nor-
ris, for a vessel within the county of Kent ? —
Not simply whether these acts were done for
the purpHOse and intent stated, namely, with
an intent to go abroad, which the acts natu-
rally import, and respecting which you have
heiutl so 'much evidence f But there remains
behind a farther subject of inquiry, in which
is contained all the question between us ; and
upop which all the guilt is to fasten, namely,
whether there was an ulterior intent to carry
intelligence to the enemy f to carry a paper
TO THE Executive Directory of France,

FOR the PORPOSE OF INVlTlllO AN INVASION
OF THE aZNGDOH OF GrEAT BriTAIN ?

Now, gentlemen, in a case of this nature,
you will carefully distinguish between the
proof of the acts themselves, and the pi^oof of
the intent, that is fastened upon tliem ; and
yet when you examine, what is all the la-
boured detail of proof on the part of the pro-
secution? What is spoken to by all the
witnesses who have been called ? What is all
the written evidence, that has been collected >
with the exception of one paper only, you wiU
find all the rest of the evidence goes to prove
merely what is not disputed; that Mr. Binns,
aqd, if you please, tinder circumstances that
have' fairly been made out, with the know-
ledge, vf'im the privity, and on the behalf of
others, did make certain treaties at Whitsta-
ble and at Deal, with the different persons
who have been called, for the hire of a vessel
to go to parts beyond the seas, as stated in
the indictment. Well, gentlemen, what
then ? What would be the fair result of all
this ? — Guilty of what^ — Guilty of an intent
to go {abroad. These are overt acts of that
intent, not that they, or any one of them,
actually did go abroad, but. tbslt from the
act') done, the treaties that were entered
into with a view to it, you are to collect this
mferaice.

Ifyoii were called upon here to say, guilty,
or ^pt |;uilty, of certain overt facts, manifest*
ing an intent to ^ abroad ; if with respect to
certain of the prisoners (not Mr. Binns, un-
doubtedly, for Mrjiom I am not counsel, but
wlHMfnfthiB evidence seems fairly to have a<s

Sqitt^ of any intent himself personally to go
brof^d) but Vitb respect to the oilier four
persons, if the questions'were, whether they
di^, or did^' npt, in the mo^th of February,
i^editate'and intend to go out of the kingdom,
u)p,ott tiie'day stated, and in tbe manner
ataied, io( certain parts beyond sea8.«*-if that
were Ih^ au^ect of charge, and all the charge,
I shoqfd certainly admit that a great body of
fvnfeope had been adduced on w part of the
prAectittoPi and* that in the result you would

1383} 38 GEORGE HI^ Trifd qfC^Cciglift 0* Connor and Men [1384

be fairly warranted in sayiiigy fve must )»ro-
nouDce a verdict against these four persons,
gniUy of an intent to go abroad. But, gen*
tlemen, is that the sabject of inquiij ? Is
that high treason ? Persons may lawfully so
to parts beyond the seas, and there may be
circumstances that may inake it unlawful to
go to parts beyond the seas. It is not lawful
tor an English subject to go to some parts
beyond the seas now : for it is made the sub-
ject of prohibition by an express act- of par-
liament, constituting it a misdemeanor, pu-
nishable with six months imprisonment, for
any British subject to go abroad, to France in
particular, without a passport, and without a
proper licence.

If that were the nature of the charge, then,
gentlemen, you would k^ve to inquire farther,
not simply whether they had intended to go
abroad generally to parts beyond seas, but
whether they had intended to go to that par-
ticular place, which was prohibited, namely,
to France in particular ; and whether they
had, or not, a licence and authority to go
there. If the prisoners were on trial for a
misdemeanor under that act, and if the iotent
were made (which it is not) a crime, and
could be made a subject of inquiry, upon that
subject I should fairly state that a great deal
of written and parol evidence has been laid
before you pressing against four persons,
to prove such a charge.— Do not mi8under«
stand rae„ gentlemen ; I do not mean to state
that all the evidence of ka intent and prepa-
ration to go abroad was not necessary on the
part of the prosecution— it certainly did con-
stitute a necessary part of the chaise, a ne-
cessary part of the proof; but all that I am
urgine is this, that when the prosecutor has
estabHsbed that part of the case, he has ad-
vanced a very little way in proving that upon
which yon are uUimatefy to pronounce your
verdictf and upon which the livee qf thete five
men are at stake.

Gentlemen, you are to say, not what they
^tually did in this country, not what they
intended to do in this country ; all that they
did in this country was to treat for a
vessel ; all that is imputed to tbtm as hav-
ing intended to do in this country, was en-
deavouring to procure a vessel, in order to
leave it, and go mto parts beyond seas. That,
I have Shown you, gentlemen, is pot treason.
*— What is treason, then ? and what is the
point and the gist of accusation against us ?—
Not what was actually done bere^nor what
"was intended to be done here— but a farther
and ulterior accusation, and upon whidi you,
gentlemen, are, if you pronounce a verdict of
^ilty against these men, to declare prophe-
tically respecting an ulterior intent to do
bereafler, tn atufther kingdom^ what they
meant to do, jTthev had succeeded in getting
abroad. This is the charge, gentlemen, ana
this the port of the cose upon which I moke
my stand. I say, this part of the chaive is
not established by the proof that the low re-

quires, and apon which vou con safely stand,
in a case of life and death, to pronounce a
verdict of guilty against any body. I say,

Sentlemen, when you ezonune it, yoo will
nd that all this part of the case rests alto-
gether upon what my lord Coke calls conjec-
ture, presumptions, and inferences, upon which
you ou^ht nut to press in a case like the pre-
sent ; it is that species of proof upon which
all the authorities have said it is dan-
gerous to rest in a case of life, but more es«
pecially in a case like the present, where un-
doubtedly the law has always stood by the
prisoner, not merely for his sake, but for the
sake of the public, in a state prosecution,
where individuals on the one side stand en-
gaged in an unequal contest with all the
weight and power of the crown opposed
against them. On that account it is that the
law stands by the prisoner, and requires that
the prosecutor shall clearly make out his case,
and shttll not leave it upon naked presump-
tions and conjecture, upon which a jury can-
not safely say they are clear in pronouncing
upon the intent of others. In this view of
the subject it will not be necessary for me
on the part of the defendants, to wade through
all the evidence that has been adduced, to go
through every particular witness, or even to
examine, more than in a very general way,
all the narol and written evidence that has
been adauced on the part of the proseaition.
You will recollect, gentlemen, that my
learned friend, in his able and eloauent opeor
ing, went through minutely all the circum-
stances respecting an intended journey, and
an intended voyage to leave the kingdom ;
all Uie witnesses that were called, eveiy
one of tliem went merely to prove all tfale
minutiae of this plan; all that is now spread
on the table before you, all the circumstances
that have been produced, to what do they
tend, but to prove all the particulars of the
journey in detail : one went to this house,
and one to the other, by sea, on horseback,
or on foot ; what hour they arrived at this
place, and the other, and a number of wit-
nesses are called to prove different prisoners
at this house, and at the other house, on this
da^, and the other ; all which are only the
minute circumstances attending a proposed
journey and a voyage abroad ; and naa this
Men a civil case, 1 certainly should, in the
venr outset of i^ the instant the other aide
had begun with a detailed proof upon thai
subject, I should have relieved my learned
friend by statmg, that undoubtedlv I did not
mean to controvert that part of the case;
that four of the prisoner^ did intend to ^ out
of the kingdom ; Mr. 0*Connor and his scr*
vant Learyi another person, for whom I am
counsel. Mr. O'Coigly; and Mr. Alien. I
admit that fair evioeiice has been given, M
to be laid before a jury in proof i&X 'toeaa
persons were all dearly connected ia an
mtent to go out of the kingdom» a^ l9
go togetBer— Gentlemen^ I wiff not anima

1385]

Jw High Treaton,

to jou a word upon th« suljoct, to iamX that,
met the weight and body of testimony, |>arol

aod written, that has been adduced before secutor has not made out that proposition.

you, you will not be warranted in that con
elusion.

But, gentlemen, now that you see what is
the nature of the charge upon which all the
question arises, I be^ to call your attention
pointedly to the subject, and to ask you to
answer — Has the prosecutor established, as
he is bound to do, beyond any reasonable
ground of doubt — ^has he established this pro-
position, that the paper, upon which atone is
fastened all the imputation, was intended to
be carried by any oody, as the charge states,
and delivered to the Executive Directory of
France, for the purpose of procuring an inva^
aion of England, or, as in one of the overt
acts it is charged, this realm — ^there is no
doubt that thb realm means the reidm of
Great Britain — the charge a^inst us, in no
part of it, relates to the mvasion of any other
part of his majesty's dominions, but is alto-
gether confined to tne realm of Great ]^tain ;
and you are, if vou pronounce the prisoners
guiltjT, to adopt this first propositioni to say
that It is clearly and satisfactorily made out,
in proo^ that this paper was intended to be
carried to the Executive Directory of France,
for the purpose stated, of procuring the inva-
sion of Great Britain ; that is the first part of
the charge.

When that is proved, if it were proved,
which it is not, the next point which
the prosecutor is obliged to make out is,
against whom that charge is established ; and,

fentlemen, if you were satisfied upon the
rst question, it would be necessary for you
carefully to ascerUun what evidence afiects
each individual prisoner, because each is res-
ponsible only for his own individual acts and
intentions. You wouTd then be to pronounce,
under this second head, whether it were pos-
sible, in any view of it, to make any body
responsible for the paper, even supposme its
destination to be as stated,whetherit ispossible,
upon the fair result of the evidence on which
you are bound to decide, to press anv respon-
sibility respecting that paper beyond one in-
dividual, who is alone implicated in it, who
alone purports to be implicated by the paper
itself, upon whom alone it is pretended to
have been found, and withoat any one cir-
cumstance to connect any other person now
standing before you in charge, not with a
general purpose of going abroad, that is not
the poin^ not ^th an intent to go out of the
Icingdom, that is not the question, but to con-
nect him with that individual paper, or to
fasten and fix upon him, more than by general
loose suspicions (much too loose to act upon
«»en in common life, and infinitely too loose
4o act upon in a court of justice upon any
subject, and least of |b11 in a case of life) the
ulterior intent of carrying that paper to the

A. D. 1798. [1386

Saper in the way stated at all madt out? I
eny that it is, and I insist upon it the pro-

Gentlemen, I do not mean to state that
here again there may not be suspicions^^ con-
jectures and presumptions; but that is not
enough, when you examine upon what ground
these suspicions are entertained; that they
are not of a sufficient nature to warrant your
verdict upon this part of the e&se, and to
fosten upon an^ body, even upon the indivi-
dual who is principally concerned with re-
spect to that paper, that there is not enough
to warrant you in saying you can venture to
pronounce, upon your oaths, that that paper
was intended to be carried to the Executive
Directory of France, for the purpose of pro-
curing an invasion of Great Britain. Before
I enter upon that subject, it is just necessary
to clear the other part of the ease, I .mean
that which respects a journey and a voyage,
by stating, that undoubtedly you have the
case of four persons, foreigners in a manner
in this oountiY, all the natives of a sister
kingdom, who have been, from circumstances
that it is not necessary more minutely to detail,
under the necessity of becoming fugitives
from their native country, except that one of
them, Leary, is the mere domestic accom-
panying his master, having no concern or will
of his own, but merely following the fortunes
of his master, without being in any respect
concerned in them. With respect to the
other persons, Mr. O'Connor, Mr. O'Coigly,
and Mr. Allen, that they had recently been
under the necessity of leaving Ireland, and
coming into tiiis kingdom for a very short
time, and soon were under the necessity of
leaving this kinsdom also.

Gentlemen, f will not attempt to conceal
from you, that thev were actually flying out
of one cotmtry, and likewise out of another;
that they were persons under charge, under
suspicion, and under accusation. When I
state this, I am not afraid that it should ope*
rate to their prc(judice upon the present sub-
ject, that they were under charee or under
suspicion of a nature not like the present;
but you all know the political distractions in
another countnr ; you all know in what a state
Ireland u, and how impossible it is for per-
sons who have token an imprudent part in
the politics of that country, which has made
it necessary for them to leave it, to avoid the
consequences of those acts; or that even if
they have takoi any decided, though not im-
prudent part, yet that in the districted state
of that country, the circumstances in which
such persons are placed, may render it impos-
sible for them safely to remain there; 1 sav
it is easily accounted for why persons of all
deseriptions should be emigrants finom it for
a time, and shoukl for the present eichai^
it, if thCT could, for any other country where
wey could safelv and properly remdn.

Executive directory of ranee, for the pur- f Gentlemen, 1 am free to state to you, that
pose stated. But » ao intent to canythiii Mr. Connor was a gentleman of high rank

1387] 38 GEORGE HI. Trial of O'Coigfyf ffCunnar and others [1388

in thai country, of an aDclent and honourable
fiuskUy, a nephew, as you have heard, of lord
Longueville — a {gentleman who had had a seat
in the Irish House of Commons, who had filled
the jsituation of high sheriff for the county of
^fk, and who had conducted himself^ as a
witness has stated, in a manner to merit the
patitude of his countrv in the execution of
^t hish and responsible office. I am not
l^re caBed upon to vindicate all the political
opinions of Mr. O'Connor ; he does not stand
now in charge npon the propriety of them,
i>or is it a question now whether he was
ri^ht or wrong in the opinions that he enter-
tained respecting certain reforms, which he
considered as necessary to be made in that
country — ^whatever his opinions were, he had
openly and plainly declared them in his place
in the House of Commons ; whether thev
ipererisht or not, he certainly had promul-
gated &'em publicly in a manly and open
yi%y ; whether, after he .had done so, it was
proper or right in him to mix in another con-
qern, as one of the witnesses has stated he
did» of a less honourable nature, to become
cpnceined in a public newspaper, called the
]^r/9S%and to make himsdf responsible for all
the content^ of that paper, and for all the
libels that mi^ht at diflereni times happen to
be adipitted mto it; wliether it was prudent
or proper in him so to do, whether he has
made niinself responsible for all the conse-
quences of that conduct, is not the subject of
enquiry to day. Your acquittal of him upon
tUe present charge, will not leave him the less
responsible for any thing that can be broi^ ht
m charge. against him Tor any thing he has
done amiss in another country, or even in this,
upon anv other charse that can fiurly be
brought borne against nim ; but, gentlemen,
you cannot be surprised that^ lihder all'these
circumstances, Mr. OConnor had ihought it
ri|;ht himself, and had been advised by his
Ihepda, actually to leave the krogdom of Ire-
land l^bout the beginning of January in the
present year. In coaseauence of what had
|i«pp#nfM), he had found himself under the
ueeessi^ of leaving that kinedom.— Why ^
^cause you have affeadv heard what was tne
%infortuoate sitiitftion of Mr. O'Connoi^ thfiU
he was.undeubtedlv an obboxious man, who
bad been, as stated by one of the witnesses,
already m>rehended, had been in custody for '
« period of six months^ and had been released
without trial, without charge against him,
after all his papen had been seized in that
loo^omy after they had been all in the pos-
fiession of the Crown for % period of six
niontbs,.aiW he had suffered close imprisonr
neqt for that time, and that during all that
period nothing bad been discoven^ agtinsi
iilm that mane him responsible to the.laws
of that coiiBtnr ; yon h«ve heard that he had
been liberated without trial.

GenflemeB, when Mr. O'Connor found that
tm, situation was such in that country, that
h$ waft liablii (the Habeas Corpua ad beii«

suspended there) to be apprehended on sua*
picion, to be subjected again to close impri-
sonment, which had already sreatlv impaired
his health, and a repetition of whicli would in
all probabiltly have been fatal to him — I say,
when a gentleman had once suffered so much
in that countrv, and was liable again to suffer,
he could not be expected to continue there ;
and here I do not mean to argue whether ii
was right or not that he should thus suffer,
whether the state of that country made it
necessary, on the part of government, to adopt
those measures; I am not standing up here
to arraign the proprie^ of them ; all that I
state is, that sucii was the fact, such the situa-
tion of that country, that a person guilty of no
crime (I am warranted in saying Mr. O'Con-
nor had not committed any, for if he had,
undoubtedly he would have been brought to
trial for it) was liable notwithstanding to be
arrested and sent to gaol, there to be kept a
close prisoner for six months. You cannot
wonder that a eentleman, under such circum-
stances, shouldthink it necessary to quit such
a country.

The apprehensions of Mr. O'Connor were
heightened also by circumstances that greatly
tended to aggravate the nature of his impri-
sonment, to excite his alarm, and to strengthen
his fears for his present safety, and to make
him dread a second imprisonment. I shall
prove, that while he was actually in close cus-
tody in that country, a sort- of conduct was
observed towards him, to which, (as I trust,
gentlepien. fpr the sake of humanity, and as
I have no doubt might be proved) the persons
holding the great and responsible situations
in that country could not in any respect be
accessoiy; but the fact is, that while he was
in the Tower at Dublin^ in no less than in
three instances, one in particular under cir-
cumstances that greatly tended to excite alarm
in his mind, Mr. O'Connor was fired, at by a
sentry with ball, in such a way, that he very
narrowly escaped with his life. Gentlemen,
under such circumstances, when such was the
situation of the country, that a man was
liable to be taken up and confined in close
imprisonroeot, not merdy at the peril of his
heajtl^ by tlie ordinary eflect of imprisonment,
but to be subject to peril and danger while in
that ^tustody from actual force, in a case where
his innocence was so clear that he was nlti-
mately liberated without a trial, it Is not to be
wondered at that ^ gen tlen^an should mdc^
vour io take the earliest opportunity of quit-
ting it, and to avoid all possibility of being
qgain placed in a similar predicament.

Xq tpe early part of the ppesent year, Mr.
O'Connor therefore cawe into this country;
thai hie h^ no other purpose whatever than
the one I have stated, via., to avoid dau^r in
his own, you will, I think, be clearly s^tislied
from his condoct when he came om. He
staid from the be^ituking of J%niary W the
latter end of Fe^ary, a p^rSod jomawbat
ahorl of two months, during whkbi tm^lMy

1389]

JcT Hi^ Trwason.

A. D. 1798.

11390

he prosecutor to prove (indeed I may boldly
state the reverse, because no proof has been
adduced to the contrary) that during all the
interval whilst he was here, any part of the
conduct of Mr. OT!onnor was, in the smalhest
degree, reprehensible, or such as to excite the
smallest suspicions of his being concerned in
any thing improper, either In thought, or in
deed. Gentlemen, the prosecutors have had
opportunities enough of knowing where Mr.
O'Connor lived, with whom he lived, how he
conducted himself during all that time. They
have got at all his papers ; you observe be has
not used the precaution of concealing or des-
troying them ; they have preserved every
scrap and bit of paper upon tne common sub«
jects of hfe, and some of a more private na^
lure ; all are found, some in his possession,
some in the possession of others, and they are
all here laid before you.

I ask you now, gentlemen, to say, whether
you discover a single circumstance, from his
arrival in Engkmd iif the beginning of Janu*
aiy, 1798, to his leaving London on Sunday
the 25th of Februaiy, one scrap of paper, that
justly fastens upon Mr: O'Connor not merely
any guilt, but even suspicion of any improper,
dishonourable, or even imprudent conduct;
that tends to show, during tnat time, he took
any part in the politics of England, or mixed
with any clubs or societies which are supposed
to exist in different parts of the kingdom. Is
there the smallest proof of it Mt is impossible
for Mr. O'Connor to prove a negative farther
than by the sort of evidence that has already
been given to vou, namely, that his most con-
fidential friends, those who saw and knew
most of him, never knew or believed that he
was connected with dny one political society
of any kind soever in the whole course of his
life ; he has positively declared the contrary
himself, and there is no proof on the part of
the crown that he ever was. Unless, there-
fore, you preyroe that he was, without proof,
contrary to his own declaration upon the sub-
ject, and contrary to the evidence of Mr. Bell
who has said that, to his knowledge or belief
it was not so, j^ou must say that during all
that period of time Mr. Ot}onnor did not mix
or connect himself with any political societies
ofanvkind whatever, good or bad. whether
ealculated to obtain pure and simple reform,
or designed for worse purposes, if any such
societies exist in the kingdom.

But, gentlemen, how did he conduct him-
self dunng this time P with whom did he as-
sociate? who were the persons he was at
that time conversant with r Here you will find
a most weighty and important part of the
ease in favour of tliis gentleman; you will
find that Mr. O'Connor Who had come into
this country in the ardent hope that he might
have been permitted qidetly ^o temain here,
had undoubtedly, though he had no connex-
ions with any part of tfe {Clitics in l^glantf,
dear and near connexions In this cfounby:
great and respectable characters in it had m

fk long period of time been Mr. O'Connor's
roost intimate and closest friends— gentlemen
with whom it is the pride aiid honour of Mf,
O'Connor's life to avow his connexion; I
trust they wiU be here by and by, and be
ready to-day to avow, on their part, their
close intimacy, warm and affectionate attach-
mentto him— -persons of shrewd and int^ll^
gent minds themselves, who will tell you, that
they never once discovered in any part of
Mr. O'Connor's life or conduct, any thing to
ibrfieit his*title to their warmest and most
affectionate esteem, and their highest opi-
nion.

Gentlemen, when I state who these per-
sons are, you will find this part of the case, to
be very important, not merely in the general
view of character, which ought always to have
great weight in any case resting merely' on
suspicion and presumption, but, m this, to ba
peculiarly essential- in showing how th^s gen-
tleman conducted himself^ with whom he
lived, in order to ne^tive the imputation 6t
this foul desi^ ; and is farther of the last
importance, when you come to apply, this part
of the evidence to the paper in auestioi\; lor
I shall put out of all ctoubt, that this evi-
dence disconnects him with that foul papei*,
and intrinsically proves that Mr. OK>onnor
could not possibly have had any concern
whatever, mrectly or indirectly, any know-
ledge or privity, respecting the contents of it.

when I come to examine its contents if
any man breaUiing can stand up, and state
he suspects even that Mr. O'Connor could
have been base enough, wicked enoueh, fool-
ish enough, to have had any knowledge of
connexion or privitv, of any sort whatevef,.
with the contents of that paper, gent!em6n, 1
might venture to state, that I would abandoii
all nope on the part or Mr. O'Connor. You
cannot c6nvict Mr. O'Connor because that
would be in a case which, on the part of the
prosecution, depends solely on presumption
and probability, to determine against all prch-
babin^, against all the workings of the hu-
man mind, against the whole history and ex-
perience of the world, against all the evidence
that human nature affords.

I have stated, that duriqg the period in
question, Mr. O'Connor was in habits of the
closest intimacy and friendship with the first
gentlemen of this country; and I am sure
with men of liberal minds, such as I have hoW
the honour to address, it will not operate, in
any respect to the prejudice of Mr. O'Connor,
or lessen the just weight thaf is due to the
testimony of those gentlemen whom I am
about to name and to call, that they are. I do
not dispute it, mostly of a particular p^Utieill
party and connexion m this country. We are
not now discussing the; question wno is rigl^t
or who is wrong; with respect to'thejiolitical
opinbns which divide this country; it would
be extremely improper to introduce any: such
dncusston into this solemn proofing. I
bop^ that all parties mean the sam^ that th»

1991 J M GEORGE III. Trial of ffCoif^, O'Connor and <dheri [IS92

ultimate object aimed at, in the condud and
Qpinions of each, is the happiness, saf'etv, and
welfare, of their country ; that though thev
may differ respecting the means, that is ail
the difference between good, wise, and intelli-
gent men of this countiy. Nay, the paper in
Suestion, if any credence or authority were
ue to it, unquestionably proves this to be the
case ; that all persons of an^ rank and condi-
tion, all persons of any emment situation in
life, are considered as nostile to the great ex-
ternal foe of the country; that they are all
united in their honor, detestation, and deter-
mined resistance (if ever the occasion should
oall for their united efforts), to a man united
to oppose the common enemy.

lam sure it will not operate upon your minds
to lessen the weight that is due to the testimony
of the eentleman we shall call, if, upon sul^-
lectsof a political natiu^, supposing you to
liave ever made politics the subject of your
thoughts, you should happen to oiffer in opi-
nion with these gentlemen. I state, thero-
fore, that Mr. O'Connor was the long, close,
and intimate friend of all the gentlemen that
have taken an active part in parliament in
opoosition to the present ministry. I shall
cailto you, as witnesses, Mr. Fox, Mr. Sheri-
dan, and many other gentlemen of great cha-
racter and respectability, to show solely their
private intimacy and connexion with Mr.
O'Connor, down to the very time that he left
London in Februarv last, receiving him at
their houses, intercban^g the most social
visits, in the manner m which the closest
friends communicate, and receive one another.
Undoubtedly thoy thought alike upon public
subjects, they thought alike upon many pri-
vate subjects, and it was that, and that only,
which united one with the other.

This, I say, gentlemen, operates negatively
and positively ; it negatives any other con-
nexion incompatible with this, and it posi-
tively proves his attachment and conbexion
with all those persons who, you will by and
by find, are the pointed objects of attack in
the paper tliat is imputed to Mr. O'Connor.
You will find throughout that paper, tliat the
greatest part of it, all the strongest, and b^
much the most acrimonious part of it (if it
was intended to be delivered, or to be shown
to anybody), is closely and directly pointed
against the best friends, the dearest and clo-
sest connexions of Mr. O'Connor, who is sup-
posed to have been the author or approver of
iL and which you nmst pronounce him to be,
if you determine that Mr. O'Connor is
guil^ of the charge in question. Gentle-
men, I state that Mr. O'Connor was qui-
etly demeanine himself, and to this hour
probably would have been employed in the
game manner, would have continued to
have lived unmolested in this country, and
certainly not taking any part in the dfairs of
»*• ?« was, in truth, actually engaged in the
politics of another i:ountry, where was his
proper sphere of action, ue had concerned

himself about the politics of this country
merely fh>m the circumstanee ef his private
frioMklups here with the genUeman to whom
I have alluded, and as a casual by* slander.

But, gentlemen, it may be said, that the
prosecutor has proved, respecting Mr. O'Con-
nor, an intent not to remam here, but to go
out of the kingdom ; why did he intend to go
out of thb kingdom ? If I could not answer
that question, and tell you why^if I were, on
the part of Mr. O'Connor, to retain a sullea
silence, and to say to the prosecutor, voo are
bound on your part, to prove, not merely what
was the reason, out to prove that the specific
reason (alleffed in this indictment was the
reason why ne was going abroad : I am not
bound to disclose any reason. If it was left
altogether In doubt what other intent he bad,
and you do not prove to the satis&ction of the
jury, the intent that you have charged,
namely, that he was going to invite an inva-
uon of Great Britain, though I were to be
totally silent on the part of Mr. O'Connor, the
jury must acquit him. And, gentlemen, I
beg you to recollect, and to retain that obser-
vation, because you will find it not an imma-
terial one, as applied to many of the topics
pressed against this gentleman, in the out-set
of this business, that the paper, and circum-
stances attending it, throws upon the gentle-
men at the bar, a supposed necessity of ex-
plaining this or that circumstance, is not a
true consideration of the case ; it would be the
greatest hardship in the world if it were so,
as I shall particularly have occasion to ob-
serve, when I come to take notice of one or
two papers produced upon tbissubjec^ and
which alone are materia) for your considera-
tion. Reverting now to the subject of this
intended departure from the kingdom, I say,
if, on the part of the prosecutor, the evidence
be not sufficient to prove the intent charged^
you must acquit Mr. O'Connor, without any
positive evidence on his part, of what was his
motive. *

But, eentlemen, I am not* disposed, on the

Eart of Mr. O'Connor, nor am I instructed on
is part, to conceal any thin^ from you; that
is not the nature of Mr. O'Connor; if be has
a fault, it is unquestionably the unguarded
frankness, and ynboundcd liberality of his
mind, characteristic of the counti^r to which
he bdongs, and peculiarly so of himself, an
open,un^arded manner of conduct, through-
out all his public and private life. Gentle-
men, Mr. O'Connor undoubtedly did intend
to go out of this country — why did he f be-
cause he was advised by the best legal advice
that the country affords, because he was in-
formed that he could not with safety remmia
in the kingdom ; that he was liable, if he M,
to be apprehended, and sent back to Irehnd,
where ne might be in danger of anotiicr cos-
tody, and the possibility of a triiH in tet
countiy. Though prieuially he sui^waetf hk»-
self to oe in a state of security hera^ hm "
told the contrary by the bast lagu.

ims}

ybf fftgk TfiQMu

A. D. 1798.

[1894

upon tht tuMect; and therefore, from the
noineiit that be received lt| unquestionably
Mr. O'Connor did, what is proved by Mr.
Bell, and what 1 do not dispute,, incessantly
endeavour to find means to go out of the
kingdom.

]£it yoo may, perhaps, ask for satisfaction
one sti^ ftrther ; does he not appear here to
be ninff out of the kingdom pnvately and se-
creuy f noes he not adopt a cnange of name P
How is this referable to a legal departure out
of the kingdom, or eooastent with what he
had a rig|it to oo ? Why does he not plainly
nvow it, apply for a passport^ and publicly go,
in the way that any other subject would, who,
for any lawful reason, had occanon to quit
the kingdom P Here again, I say, it would
not be mcumbent upon me to go into the
specific reason. If the prosecutors do not
nsten upon it the intent chai^ged, even if it
^verc to DO left to general suspicion only, what
was the reason and motive for Mr. O'Connor
having recourse to these methods, all that you
could fairly say would be this, that there was
some reason* why it was necessary for Mr.
O'Connor to go privately out of the country,
not in the regular channel, not with vouchers
and doetiments that a person having a right
to go would have had about him, at the tune
he actually went. But it does by no means
follow that he was going to commit treason,
because he was gomg privately out of the
kingdom ; for if tmit argument could hold, no
man could ever be gui% of that, which* is a
subject of charge in a particuhu' act of parlia:
ment that has prohimted British subjects,
without licence, going out of this kingdom
into France, at the penl of committing a mis-
demeanor, and being liable to six months im-
prisonment. It might always be said, oh,
they go out privately, there must be some il-
licit and improper cause, no man would go
out in that manner who had not some wrong
intent in it, and you must go the length of in-
ferring, that every mkn that does so is there-
fore to be suspected of high treason; you are
to jump to the conclusion, that every man
who is going to France, without licence, is to
be suspected of high treason. Proof that he
intended to go secretly, is to be a sufficient
foundatkm for a jury to establish, l^ their
verdict, that he did intend to commit treason,
in the foreign country to which ht was des-
tined. No, the law does not say that, the
laif does not teach to inferences and presump-
tions in this manner; other proof must be
«ven than the bare circumstance of a private
oeparture fiom the kingdom— of a conceal-
ment of purpose, name, object, and destine*^
tion; such are only circumstances, and not
alone fairly warrsnting^a conclusion of a pur-
pose of treason.

But, gentlemen, is it not easily explained
why Mr. O'Connor should go out in this
manner } If Bir. O'Connor was informed,
that by stoving here he was liable to be ap-
prehended by the government of the coimtiy, I

VOL XXVI, ^ I

was it not indispensably necessary for him,
when he was resolved to go out of tlie king-
dom, to execute his plan with secrecy f and
surely, if you see one pbun and obvious mo-
tive for a man's conduct, you will not look
for any other. In the prosecution of the plan
prescribed to him, it was absolutely necessary
for Mr. CConnor that he should go without
the knowledge of government. He could not
therefore apply for a passport to the duke of -'
Portland, oecause that would immediately
have frustrated his object, and instantly have
made him the prisoner of that government, to
whom he disclosed hb intention. It is quite
ridiculous to assert that meaning to go out <^
the kingdom, and being adviseathat he must
do so, lor the purpose of avoiding arrest, and
imprisonment, he could safely go openly to
government, and declare, that he, Arthur
O'Connor, wanted a passport to go out of the
kingdom, to parts beyona the seas. There-
fore, I saj^ if is very naturall;)r accounted for
why Mr. O'Connor should wish to go out of
the kingdom, and go out under the circum-
stances that have appeared in evidence. But
it may be said, why does not he go out alone,
er accompanied only by Leary nis servant,
his common domestic, who had lived with
him some time ? Here he is goiifg out with
others, that is to say, with three other personsi
as it u charged, Mr. Allen, Mr. O'Coigly, and
Mr. Binns^ now happened they to go as part
of his company?

Now, genUemen, here again permit me to
have recourse to the same argument that I
have used before. If I were not able to ex-
plain to you hy what accidental circumstance,
or by what projected plan, those who intended
to go with turn, happened to be drawn into
his company — ^indeed, with respect io one of
them, I submit it to you, and it will be here-
after more foil V pointed out to your attention,
bv his counsel, the intent to go personally
abroad, seems foirly negatived by theevidence,
-—but with respect to the other two. if I were
not able to explain wh;r tbev were or his part^,
for the purpose of going abroad tosether pri-
vately, would it necessarily follow, that there-
fore they are all to be supposed to have had
the same reason, to have had the same mo-
tive, to have had the same design for going f
It would be incumbent on the prosecutor to
prove that ; he must prove the design of one
mdividual of the party, and when he has
proved that, he must connect the othen with
that design, not with the bare design of going
abroad, M with the farther design of going,
with the treasonable intent, which must be
fastened on the single individual, before he
can be convicted. It would be the rashest
conclusion in the world, that because four
persons either intend to go, or actuaUy go to-
gether upon any journey, or voyace, in the
kingdom, or out of the kingdom, the design
of each is the design of all, and that each man
is responsible for what the others intended.

Gentlemeni I shall by*and?by have oocama

4U

1395] 38 GEORGE UI. Trial oJO'Coigh^, (yCannor and otkm [1396

to observe more particularly upon that subject,
but I shall only state here, that you will re-
collect the cmuprobandi again lies ufpn the
prosecutors, even if I gave no explanation on
the part or .those for whom I appear. But
you have probably anticipated what is ex-
tremely obvious, and naturally accounts for
these tour persons going together,— they were
ally as you observe, the natives of the same
country, having all recentl v quitted it, had all
been a very short time in this, three of them
under the necessity of leaving this country
for a similar reason that had driven them
from Ireland. This naturaUy brings them all
united in one object, that is to say, in the
object of ijoing out of this country, for that
they all wishM to go out of it I admit, so &j
they may fairly be considered as being united
together, just as when any persons are united
together, m golne from place to place. And
it might be equally predicated of alKthat go
in a stage coach or a barge together, tluit
they are united in one design, in goine from
one place to another, thougn each iaotvidml
may have his own pnvate reason for so doing.
But is it extraoidinaiy Uiat these gentlemen
should intend to so together? Is there any
thtnff more natural or more fidrly accounted
lor, than tne drcumstances that are now given
n evidence before you ? I therefore, gentle*
men, freely admit such to be the situation of
things in the latter end of th^ month of
February, when the evidence on the part of
the prosecution commences*

Now, gentfemen, give me leave to request
your utmost attention, to what specific evi-
dence has been adduced on the part of the
prosecution, to carry the case bevond this^
and to fosten upon any body ue intent
charged, to go to the Executive Directory of
Thmce, and to cany the paper in question.
And here, gentlemen, that I may act in the
foirest manner, and broadly and in a manly
way meet the charge in its follest extent,I am
not disposed to controvert th» proposition,
that if, on the part of the prosecutor, they
can inake out, that there was a clear design
to cany that paper to the Executive Directoiy
of France, for the purpose of producing an
invasion of this kingdom, that it is most cer-
tainly unqualified high treason ; and ought
to make the individual who bad such a de-
aign, responsible for it ; farther I will admit
too, that, if there was in the rest privity of
the contento of that paper, tiie knowledge of
the design to cany it to the Executive iSreo-
tory of Pnmce, for the purpose stated, and
that they so went together with the person
carrying such a pa|)er, and were actually, and
can fairiy be iconsidered as joint earners of
that (xaper, for that purpose, I have no diffi-
culty in admitting, that you ought, undoubt-
edly, as the law is, and ou^ht to be, to omke
them all implicated, and uvolved in all the
consequences of this indictment.

Gentlemen, do I not feirly, and plainly,
•ttd 4^ienly, meet the law upon the subjectP

I stand upon the fact; because I am confident
upon the fact. It is my bounden duty nut,
before such a tribunal, to arsue questions that
are dearly settled in point of law. I feel no
danger in admitting that to be the law ; I
have no difficulty in saying, that with that
admitted state of the law, as applied to Uie
facts which have been proved here, you cannot
safdy pronounce, that this intent is satisfacto«
rily and dearly ouide out, upon theevidence be-
fore you,against any oneorthe prisoners. Give
me leave, gentlemen, before I enter upon the
spedfic evidence upon this subject, to request
tnat you particularlv attend to the doctrine
advanced bv the highest and the nmvest aiH
thorities, those wlu> have had toe greatest
experience in criminal law, the wisest, the
ablest, and the best men of their day, dictat-
ing to courts of justice, and to themsdves^
what ought to be the conduct of all tribunals,
in matters of life and death ; when they are
engaged in an inquiry like the present, and
are to form their iudgment upon the kind of
evidence, by which the present prosecution ii
supported.

Vou observe, gentlemen, you are called
upon, on the fMurt of the prosecutor, to saj
wittt is the intent of another.— The intent is
not virible to the human ^e; youaretodia-
oover it by circumstances that exist, you art
to take upon youradvss to pronounce, respect-
ing the hidden purpose of another maa's
nund, what was his intent with respect to aD
the tuis which he is proved to have done.
That is an inquiry, in -ail cases, attended witk
infinite difficulty, even in the common a&ira
of life, for one man to pronounce, from cir-
comstanoes, and from conduct, what waa the
intent of any other man's mind, with respect
to particuhr acts; but, undoubtedlv, the
degree of the atrett|thof the case, will depend
upon the nature ofthe acts, how for they do^
or do not indicate, sufficiently deariy, the
intent of acts that are unquestionably, and
certainly proved to have been done — How
ht they are, ortue not, indicative of the in-
tent ehaiged.— ^me acts are so plainW ex-
pressive of the intent, that Juries are nirly
warranted in drawing the inference other
acts are more equivoou, stand doubtfol, and
referrible to one cause or another, to one
motive or another, the condusion then be-
comes more diffioilt; when to acts of that
sort you are to impute any particular intent,
acU that are capable of being refencd to a
hundred di£ferent purposes and motives^ tnea
it becomes a matter of great caution, to b^
ware how far you take upon yourselves to
fasten upon those acts, a specific intent; how
easily may you be mistaken and deceived by
drcumstances, to suppose that to be the
intent of another, which in truth was not.—
I shall state the doctrme upon this aul^ect
from the highest authority, and I beg you to
carry in mind» when you come to '^~^
the evidpnoe before you, what the
authorities in the law hate aaid, iritb

1997]

>•

Treaion.

A. D. 1798.

[J1398

to presiiini^ft •videneey and bow fiff il ought
to operate m all matters of crimiiial inquiry.
Gentlemeik I wouldentreat you to attend
to what, as aflbrding a fair- analogy, is said
by my lord Hale, in speaking of the doctrine
of presumptive evidence, how far it is safe, or
even pro|>ery in any criminal inquiries, to
rely upon it, and what his own experience had
taught him, was the danger, and the falli-
bUitv of even strong circumstances ; such as
would have been thought to warrant the con-
elusion, and yet have turned out to be totally
fallacious, and to have led to very unfortunate
consequences, to have subjected innocent men
to death.^— I will state to you what my lord
Hale has, in his ^leas of the Crown, handed
down to posterity, as rules for the guide and
conduct of all courts of criminal judicature,
upon subjects like the present—** In some
cases" (says he) ** pretumpHve evidence goes
&r to prove a person guilty, though there be
BO express proof of the hct to be committed
by him — but then it must be very toarify
preited^ for it is better five guilty persons
ahould escape unpunished, than one innocent
person shoiud die.*'— He then states a circum-
stance that had passed within his own know-
ledge, ^ If a horse be stolen from A, and the
same day B be found upon him, it is a strong
presumption that B stole him ; yet I do re-
member, before a very learned and wary judge
in such an instance B'' (that is the person
found upon the liorse) ^ was found guilty,
was condemned, and executed at Oxford
asslces, and yeL inthin two assizes after,
another nerson being apprehended for ano-
ther robbery, and convicted, upon his judg*
ment and execution, confessed he was the
nan that stole the horse, and being closely
pursued, desired B'' (that is the person found
«pon the horse) ^' a stranger, to walk his
borae for him, while he turned aside upon a
necessary occasion, and escaped, and B was
apprehended with tlie liorse, and died inno-
ecntly/*

Now here, gentlemen, were strong circum-
stances, and, as lord Hale afterwards states,
^ persons really innocent may be entangled
under such presumptions, that many times
cany great probabilities of guilt/* There
were very 'strong circumstances there to in-
duce-a reasonable ground of presumption ; a
man is found with a stolen horse, and, it may
be said, is not this a reasonable ground, upon
which the juiy may fairly draw an inference,
itaX lie was the man who stole it. But, says
my lord Hale, and he mentions this remark-
able inMance that had fallen within his own
knowledge : ^ take care how you draw conclu«
aioos ftSok ' circumstances, let it be warily
pressed, because often it is fisdlible, and leads
%A erroneous and dangerous conclusions;
theiefore,** adds lord Hale, '« I would never
convict atty person for stealing the eoods of a
penon unknown, merely because be would
Slot gl^re an account how he came by them; ''
givtifiie ^leave t^ request your attention to

that— '^ unless there were due proof made
that a felony was committed of these goods,*'
—merely that a man b found with goods'
upon him, and will not give an account of
them,— wh^r that, says lord Hale, may induce
a presumption, that a man stole them, and
did not come honestly by them, for why (it
maybe said) will not an innocent man tell
how he came by goods found in his posses-
sion; but, says loiS Hale, « I never would
convict wiUiout first requiring that there
should be that corpui delidt^ that there should
be the hct established previously, of a felony
being actually committed." So he says, ^< I
w6uld never convict uny person of murder, or
manslaughter, unless the fact were proved to
be done, or at least the body found dead, for
the sake of two cases, one mentioned in my
lord Coke's Plea^ of the Crown, cap. 104,
' page S3S, a Warwickshire case."

** Another happened in my remembrance in
Staffordshire ;"— lord Hale then states a re-^
markable case, that had happened within his
own memory, proving the fallibility of pre-
sumptive evidence: "A person was long
missing, and, upon strong presumptions,
another was supposed to have murdered^ him,
and to have consumed him to ashes, in an
oven, that he should not be found; upon which,
that person was indicted for murder, and con-
victed, and executed." You observe here,
upon strong presumptions — lord Hale states
it-4md within one year afterwards, the man,
who was supposed to have been murdered^
returned, being indeed sent beyond sea by
the man who was accused of his murder;
against his will; and so, says he, *^ though
the man who was under accusation, justly
deserved deaUi, yet he was really not guilty
of that ofience for which he suffered." ^ Herer
there was unquestionably misconduct in thd
individual under accusation. He had donCp
to a certain degree, what he was highly cri-
minal in having done. It warranted strong
presumptions agunst him, yet says lord Hale
m that case, by too rashly drawing the con-
clusion, an innocent man, innocent of the
particular charge against bun, was actually^
convicted and executed.

Lord Hale refers to another case, men-
tioned in lord Coke, illustrative of the same
general doctrine, bow warily a jury and a
court, ought to act upon presumptive evi«
dence ; a very remarkable case that had hap-
pened m Warwickshire, which is familiar to
every body ; '' an uncle who had the bringing
up of his niece, to whom he was heir at law,
correcting her for some ofience, she was
heard to say, ' good uncle, do not kill me ;'
after which time, the child could not be
found, whereupon, the uncle was committed
upon suspicion of murder, and admonished,
by the Justices of assize, to find out the
child by the next assizes ; against which time,
he could not find her." Here you will find
that the petson accused of the fact, had at-
tenipted, what justly created very strong pro*

1599] 38 GEORGE IIL

of O'Cq^, aanm» and oik^ [1400

tumptions against hlm^ha had recotme to
« fiJie testiiiioDy in lupport of his defence ;
** he bnmsht another child, as Uke her in
person ana years, as he ooald find, and a]>-
parelled her uke the true child ; but, on exami*
nation; she was found not to be the true child
— upon these presumptions, he was found
guiltjT, and executed— but the truth was, the
child being beaten ran away and was received
by a stranser, and afterwards, when she came
of age to have her land, came and demanded
iL and was directly proved to be the true
cbild/'-*Thi8 is a history that ought to make
men cautious of dewing rash presumptions
in criminal cases of lite. Three instances
are stated by lord Hale and lord Coke, and
held out as a wamins to all courts of justice,
bow warily they ougnt to press presumptive
evidence in matter of life. Lord Hale con-
cludes with observing, that persons really
innoccoit may be entangled under such pre-
aumpUons that many times carry great pn>-
babuities of guilt*-tnat is his inference. I
do not mean to state that these particular
eases are any otherwise applicable to the pre-
sent, than for tbe sake of tbe eenend doctrine
laid down by lord Hale, which is in truth the
doctrine of common sense, of common expe-
rience, and teaches how extremely fidlible is
reasoning drawn from presumptions, though
strong in themselves, bow often thqr lead to
&lse and erroneous conclusions, and therefore
how warily they ousht to be adopted in any
case, taione especial^ in a case of life.

Now, gentlemen, do not let it be inferred
I mean to state, that in no case is a court of
justice to act upon presumptions, let the cir-
cumstances be ever so strong,— no, that is not
tbe doctrine, but the doctrine is this, that
presumptions ought to be warily pressed, that
the jury ought to weigh them cautiously and
mirdealy, and to bear in their remembrance,
that in their nature they are deceptive, that
they may lead to enoneous condiisions, that
nnocent men may be entangled under strong
presumptions of euiit, and that in doubtful
eases, as lord Hale says, ^ IkUiut temper ett
errare in AcqiMando quam in puniendo, eg
parte miierieordiiB quam em parte juttitiieJ* It
IS safer to err on that side; that is the con-
elusion, not that you are universally forbid to
act on circumstantial evidence, but that
where it comes to be a measuring cast, you
are to take the eeneral presumption of inno*
cence along with you, and not in a case of
hfe, te infer the imputed guilt, unless the cir^
cumstances are so strong, so pointed, and so
clear, that ihey cannot tairly be referribleto
a cootraiy inienC. . .

Having stated tbes^ general prindples, let
us examine tbe circumstances that hav^heen
laid befeoe you, whether they are of a nature
suflkient to ivarraot a verdict of guilty ; how
jiivithas been made out dearly and iairly as
it ought to be to your satis&etion, that it was
the mtent of any body to carry the paper in i
4)uesUon, the only pajier vhiph is pti^tei^ded

to have been desthied for thai pwpoaa, to
the Executive Directory of Franee. Ton
observe, the prosecutor is In poisesskm of
all the luggage of all the persons who wwa
stopped ; there is not a suggestkm in any
part of the case, on the part of the prosecu-
tion—theip b not a witness who has hinted
attheidea, that at any period of the jomqr,
or at any one place, there was any paper or
bit of paper concealed or destroyed vj any
one of them ; you are not to ptesyme tliia^
unless there he some evidence; there is
indeed clesdr evidence to the oontrsiy; bo*
cause, if the prisoners had been disposed to
destroy their papers, if they had used such a
sortofprecaution, unquestionably the proseon-
tors would not have been in possession of all
the evidence they have produced, of all tho
most private and particular papers bsloiig^ to
each prisoner; butpapers off that oalorB are
actually found, which excludea the idea that
any had ever been destroyed; you are tbera-
fore warranted in believing that yoo have
before you all the papers that these persona
had in their possession of any kind whatever.

Now m the result of all the oiaminatiun
you have heard, and von seeing nothing has
been left undone, and properl|y so, notfaiiic
has been left behind tliat the industiy and
weight of the crown could jvoduee, mm ail
quarters of the different kingdoaii» there is
no paper of any kmd whatever^ dqjdmed So
convey intelligence to the Execativo Dkecteiy
of France, except one. It is a most cxtr**
ordinary drcumstanee, if it was tho design
of any body of men in this country, if any
such body of men exists, callmg themselves^
as they are sUted here, the Secret Goauratleo
of England, if it was thor design to send
mtelligence to France, for the piirposo of
inviting an invaHon of this kingdom; it
seems to me to be a most extraoidinaiy eaa^
certain)^ it is the first that ever existed in
histoiy, where so much industry should bo
employed, so much Ishour wod expcoao
undertaken as to hire fobr wsssengsrs So
carry one paper; one paper only is fiound, and
that is unquestionably the on(y one thai
existed. But, sentlemen, besides left us ob-
serve, under what circumstances is iMa psper
found, and what there is to prove, on Ae part
of the prosecution, that it was n aenova
paper of the kind stated, upon which jo«
are to venture to take away the livea of
five persons.

In the first place there is not the least
tittle of proof on the part of the piqsicution,
there is not the least suggsstioii thai ibeiw
does, in point of feet, exist anQrsoch 1^^<^
men |is this paper professes to, cqom nons ;
for any thins that is proved before yoo, it oh^
be the productwn of some idle ganretleer.
the random workings of some madman, some
absurd, frantic, footish person, wbo^woa
writing a paper of thn absurd natures^ wMJmoI
having any nerious meaning, without hoyjjy
any ku>d of authority^ ^noaxioa or

1401]

Jfir High Tftnarh

A, D. 1796.

[IMS

poadsooi of AM lorl wliMvor with the par-
aoan to whom ft b addresied. Yoq will per^
bapsy auppote that improbablo; I state ft as
mere eoiyecttire on our part, but I state with-
out be»tation, that then being no evidence
to prove Chat there does, in fact, exist any
secret oommklee of Enghuid^ you are not to
presume it Oa the part of the crown th^
iiave, of course^ been using all means to find
out, and th<qr have^ ii may reasonably be
auppoeedy the means of discovering if there
does exist such secret oommtttee any where ;
no evidence has been adduced to prove that
it does exist, and therefore I have a right to
say that it stands on mere presumption, ex-
cept as it*is proved by the paper itself. But
whether the paper actually was written by
one individual, unconnected with an^ body,
whether written lor the purpose of mischief,
or for any other wild, absura, or extravagant
purpose, I say, rests altogether without any
proof on the part of the prosecution ; if there-
fore, there be none on mine, we stanain this
respect on an equal footing But it does not
stand indifferent upon this subject, for the
|Ka|>er itself, and the drcum^ances under
which it was found, furnish fiur negative
evidence, that it did not and could not come
JTOm any body of men whatever, conducting
themselves wioi ordinary caution and prudence
in the prosecution of the supposed plan, or
even with common sense, and the same ar-
Cwment applies to those who had the charge
ofiL

If it was a paper of the description charged,
eeni hj a body of men, constituting the secret
committee of England, to the ExequUve Di-
vectory of Fiance, this will beadmittedto
ine^ that no man could be the carrier of it
without knowing the personal danger to him-
ael^ he must have known, that in case of his
iapprehension and this paper found lUNm him,
lie would certainly forfeit his fife» Will you
iMBlieve then, the bearer of it, ifhe had known
it to be a paper of that description, would
not have aaopted ordinary caution for his own
personal safety, much more if UMny lives
were known to be atstaHe; surely, I say,
that ordinary caution and ordinary care at
least would Imve been used on two accounts;
first, because if it was a paper of sufficient
consequence to have a messenger employed
in the transmission of it, it was necessary for
the safe^ of the paper, and for the object of
the mission constituting the sole purpose of
it, that it should be protected with peailiar
care; next it was necessary that care and cau-
lioo ahoold be used for the sake of the indi-
vidual or individuals who were entrusted with
the conveyance of it. Now, does there ap*
pw in any part of this business, from the
^videooe given by the crown, ordinary cau*
lion to have been used with. a view to either
ofihese objects?— Was there ever a messenger
rmpWyed in a purpose like this (and espe-
piaUy one, who as is supposed by the con-
tents of Stm paper, to nave been a person

practised In such an empkmoiBL to have
once before been the bearer of asuauar pa|m-,
and therefore knowing the orAnaiy caotion
necessary to be taken irith regsrd to it), who
was guilty of such rash, imprudent, mad, and
fooliui*conduct, as upon the bypotbeus of the
prosecutor, all the individuals standing hem
accused before you, did conduct tbennelvei
with in respect to this paper ?

You find, from the evidence adduced on the
part of the prosecution, that afler they had
arrived at WhiUUble, on Monday the Mth of
February, even the first day after their airivai,
a circumstance happened, that would have
put them upon their guard, that pointed out
to them, even if before-hand the natora of
their errand and their mission did not &tate
particular caution, they were roused to it if
they were insensible before by a drcumsianea
that happened in the first commencement of
this desperate undertaking, megnant with
danger every step they took. Th^ were en-
deavouring, you observe, to go wm ciremn-
slances ofconcealment with respecf to thenn
selves and the olject of their vo)rage» but
not with respect to thb paper.

I^ith respect to the voyase, bv which they
mean to go secreUf out of toe kmriom, tbs^
adopt all the ^rdmary means oT^cautiona
would you not therefore. expectfirom the samo
men, ordinary cautk>i| to be observed with
respect to an object of greater momentf Piri^
I say, generally upon such an occasion^ men
of all descriptions, would be cautious; bu|
next, when I dfit these men cautious upon all
other subjects, and those of less moment, of n
less pressing nature, in every point of view, I ans
led to expect from them, upon the hypotbesia
of their beine bearera of a treasonable paper^
at least simi&r caution with respect to that
important paper; but ifthey were not sensiblo
of the necessity of 9uch viplance before,
surely the dullest mind, a mmd that never
had been employed in a business of this kind
before, would h»ve been roused to peculiar
caution by the circumstance that happened
on Monday morning at Whitstable. Is it not

K roved tb^ on that morning a circumstance
appened that intimated fairly to them all,
that they were suspected persons ; that they
were known to be there, that the eyes of too
public officers were upon them ! that they
were watched; that they were liable^ every
stop they took, to be apprehended and search-
edr nay, itappears that at Wbitstoble, Unyy
actually were searched. You recojllect it la
proved, that Mr. King, the revenue officer,
and the other persons who came with the
luggage from on board the hoy. insisted upoa
examining the contents of the luggage at
Whitstable, and that after they were jgpne,
or rather at the time, the UmdlOnf ap-

Srised some of the prisoners of their futore
anger, and told them that they might expect
to be searched at Margato. Knowing tnei^
that the^ were become the objects of suspiciopi
and notiveci b^ Xl^p pil)>)ic f#peri pf g?ve w

140S] 38 GEORQB UL TrM of (yCmgfy, ffComw and others [14M

ment. in ccnuequenoe of the chcumstances
that had happened, they weie called upon,
ftom Ihenoeiorth at least, if they had not
beoi up to that timoi to bis more particularly
cautious during the remainder of the journey.
«-How then can you possibly conceive that
these men could be conscious, that there was
in the pocket of one of them a paper of this
description, and that no means should be
emplc^ed to put it out of the reach of being
taken m the event of their bdng apprehended
•ad again searched ; would not some of the
best means have been adopted for this pur-
pose, such as easily suggest themselves to
persons who are in the habit of bemg bearers
of papers of this dangerous nature, to put it
beyond the possibility of detection ?

A thousand means might easily have been
adopted to make it impossible, in case of a
■econd search, to have fastened upon them a
«n^ drcumstance relative to this paper; it
was extremely easy for an individual to have
put it into a cypher known to himself, which
be miffht have translated afterwards when he
•nrivea in'France, in a way that had he been
apprehended, and the cypher destroyed, it
wmild not have been possible lor any incmd-
dual 10 have known what was the nature of
the paper actually eonv^ed; but here is a
paper not in cypher, not in any disguised
epithets and luiguage, but in plain direct
lerms^ treason in every line of it; if it weie a
senuine paper, being what it purports to be,
from a Iwdy of men here^ addressed to the
ExecttUve Directory of France, which every
man who sees it, instantly observes is plain,
palpable, direct treason, and points out those
lo be traitors who have it what now is the
conduct of those who are said to have the
care of it f— Where do they put it for the pur-
pose of secure custody, care and concealment ?
In a great coat pocket: why gentlemen is it
possible to conceive that any one place could
nave been thought! of more liable to danger
than that was; the clothes, the most conspi-
euDus when worn, yet liable at any time to
be separated from the person, and in the
event of danger n6t at hand to have its con-
tents destroyed. What were these four bearers
of a treasonable paper, upon the Hm of it
undisguised treason, appnzed of danger, ex^
pecting, and apprehending search, at Mar-
gate, and has not any one of Uiem common
sense or common caution, to adopt better
means of concealment, or nnd a place to put
it in better than the great coat pocket of one
of the indi^duals coneeraed F

Gentlemeo, I state this to be a vtery strong
circumstance to show, that in the judgment
of th« pe^rson to whom it was known to be
there^ it must hav<e been cdnttderod as an idle
paper, of no consequence or validity^ and n6t
of the important natoM that it is now repre^
sented to be, and therelb^e mixed %iUi common
papers, in a place of the least custody, or
safety ; but if this great coat did contain a
paper, of this value and importance^ surely,

some particular candon would liave been ob«
servea with respect to the care of that mat
coat, when the party were at Maigate, where
they expected to be searched, where they
knew they were watched ; surely, they would
at least, if the paper was to be left in a great
coat pocket, have put that great coat mere
it would not at once strike the eye of the first
man that came into the house. Now let us
see what is the account given of it.

Why, gentlemen, Mr. Fugion, and Mr.
Bevett, two Bow*8treet officers, upon whose
testimony you are entirely to depend as to the
proof that any such paper as this, was actually
found in that great coat pocket, relate that
upon their commg into the room, a comnKm
room in a public inn (I do not speak of its
being common, in the sense of being aooes-
sible to more tnan one party, but I meao ia
this sense common, that any other par^, of
any description of person^ mieht have ooco*
pied it, when not engaged by Uie individuab^
that had been there over n^ht); a room
where the company bad supped the preoe&ig
evening, and where they were to bieakftst
in the morning, they find hanging upoo a
chair, a great coat, with this important paper
in the pocket ef it.

Why, gentlemen, during the whole mg^l^
was that room locked? was it secured ? were
any means taken to ]»event any mere spec-
tator, the waiter, even if he had not been so
attentive as to hear the scratdune of a pen
through a lattice in the next roofo, out a man
who has the ordinary curiosity of a waiter^
from examining the ereat coat, and inspecting
the paper. In a puuic-inn at Maigate, a sea-
port town, accessible to all descriptHms of
Eersons, constantly coming in and out, at all
ours of the day and nisht, if any party, after
these gentlemen had left the room, and were
gone to bed, or any individual seeing a loose
peat coat, had from motives, either of cu-
riosity, or from a msh to pick the pockets of
it, examined what it contained, he inig|bt in-
stantly have 0>t the possessbn of tiiis paper,
which, according to the charge in thia case,
might subject to death, four persons who were
sleeping in the adjoining rooms.

Suip^ it is impitosible to reconcile this with
the ordinary caution of men concerned in ai^
purpose, and much less in a purpose of Urn
nature; surely, they would at least liave done
that, which natural caution would have dic-
tated; when they went* into their bed-room
at night, they would have carried the g^nat-
coat with them or some of them, for oonceal-
nlent or better car^ and to keep it firom ai^
casual observer; ana therefore, the leaving it
in that exposed eituation, adds extremely to
the improbabitity of a coii!>ciousness in any
body, that there was any thins of weight, or
importance, in the paper itseu, diat abonld
dictate caution with respect to iL— Fira^ be-
cause of its h^ing raerny pot in a great coat
pocket ; next, left loose in a common room,
and exposed, to be found in the naoner tlw
I witnesses have described it...

1405]

Jar High Tnason.

A. D. 1798.

[140G

But, gentlemeDy the content! of the paper,
seem to roe to negative all reasonable (ground,
to suppose that it could have been wntten m
the way alleged, and addressed by any body
here, to ajiy well-informed and intelligent
people in France^ for the purpose suggested.
It is supposed, that a secret commitleeiormed
in England, was meditating the horrid and
wicked purpose, of inviting a ferocious enemy
to invade this country ; that they hired a mes-
senger to carry intelligence to the enemy.— >
Why, gentlemen, sureW itwiUnot be said, that,
if such a body exists, they do not know what
all the world besides does, the character and
description of the persons to whom they i|re
writing ; that, at least, those men, abandoned
and profligate as Uiey are, upon many sub-
jects, have sense, and understanding, and ex-
perience in state matters— as their successes
against almost all Europe must evince; and
that, therefore, any person being wicked
enough to address them, would, at least do
it in a way that was likely to gain attention,
in a way likely to be of some use to that
Directory. Men do not engage in treason
for notmne, they do not hire a messenger to
cany mere^ high-soundine epithets, pompous
sentences, and bombast phraseology of Ian*
guage; or to convey rasn and general infer-
ences and conclusions ; without any detail of
fiuzts. without any minute intelligence that
could be of importance to an.enemy. No map
concerned in a plot, to invite an enemy to in-
vade a country, could be foolish enough to
send intelligence not worth having.

But at the particular period, when this
paper b supposed to have been sent, to be
put into the hands of the Executive Directory
of France, was the inva^n of En^and a new
idea? Did the enemy never think of it till
it was put into their hoids, by the Secret
Committee of England, in the month of Fe-
bruary, 1798? Are these persons to send a
messenger over to France, to point out the
invasion of England, as a happy thought, a
new plan? Is it not matter ot public noto-
riety, that the Executive Directory had
threaten^ the invasion of England, whether
with an intent to prosecute it, or only as a
measure in terrorem or for any other purpose,
for. a length of time before ; nay, they are
even in this pa{>er, applauded for their public
proclamations, issued for months together;
announcing to the whole world, that they
had had that subject under their anxious con-
sideration ; therefore, it could answer no pur-
pose, to send any paper by way of suggestion
or bint on this subject. But, it may m said,
it was not to suggest the idea, but to encourage
France to carry it into effect ; to pat them on
the back, and induce them to prosecute their
intended purpose. Well, then, if that was the
wish, surely they should address to that Di-
rectory, topics likely to induce them to adopt
the meallure recommended, or at least, to
persevere in it Is there one word in this
paper, from the beginning to the end of it

and I beg you to read it by-aad>by, lor thai
purpose), adapted to this object ? Does it
contain one syllable of intelligenoe, that th*
Executive Directory of France roust not have
been actually in possession of (able as thqf
are to reason upon the case), is there any ape*
cific intelligence of facts, which the Executive
Directonr of France might not derive a know<»
ledge or, by the means they are known to
possess, of gettine at all that passes publicljr
m this kingdom? I mean public measures^
actually jgomcc on in this kingdom. We all
know it has been openly said, by one of the
roinisters of the country, and therefore it can
be no secret^ that there are, in this eotmtiy,
among foreignAs ^at reside here, as many
spies of the Executive Directory of France, as
France chooses to pay. But, upon some sub*
jects they do not want spies. With respect to
the state of the finances of this country : the
exact state in fisures, with respect to all the
public ways ana means of the idngdonif they
want nd spies, nor any messeneer firnn a secret
committee: they have knowudge upon that
subject, more precise and accurate than any
ordinary person can j^ve them ; and certain^
much more than this paper conveys : there*
fore, when this paper states, by way of intelli-
gence to the Executive Directory of Francei
that' the ^stem of borrowing is at an end, that
the government has tried to raise a kind of
forced loan, which has failed ; that every tax
diminishes that revenue it was intended le
augment, and that the voluntary contiibutwns
produce almost nothing ; I say that such could
not be any specific intelligence to the Execis-
tive Directory of France, which thc^ had not
aJready obtained without it. They knew, from
other sources, how fi^r the system of borrowing
was at an end, how fisr a forced loan bad been
tried, and how far contributions had succeeded
or not Hie paper is merely a comment ufwa
facts, not a dfetailed statement of any thing
specific, which such committee of RngUmd
might know, and which the enemy did not*
With respect to the state of the kingdom, it
is the subject you all know of a speech pub^
lisheS in the papers, setting forth m detail aU
the means and ways of the kinedom, all its
resources, all the means by which a revenue
is to be collected, and the application of it.
All such intelligence coidd be got therefore
from the pubhc newspapers; and you will
not suppose, that the Executive Directory of
France, would have thanked ^y body for
high-sounding comments or conclusions, with-
out the disclosure of any one fact, which they
did not know before. If this paper had been
intended to be addressed to the vulgar, to
hold out general ideas to the mob, tocaptivale
or delude the ordinary class of people ; then
it might be said, this generality will pass.
There are well rounded sentences, calculated
to tickle the ears of persona who do not inves-
tigate correctly, ana who may be induced to
act upon such materials. But that ia not the
case with any seciet committee, sending i»-

1407] S8 GEOROS m. Triid of VCci^y, ffCann&r and oihm [140S

lelligmi to Chi Execiitlw Directory, fit for
their inspection, and prop^ for tiiem to act
upon: thej could only hope to make the
trantmtafe valuable, to midce It an object of
attenUon, bv the communication of ^ta not
known to toe Directory befoni; bv putting
them in poeeeaaton of facta material for them
to know, and which, when sifted and investi-
ntad, m>rd solid and reasonable grounds
lor them to act upon^-^The paper then states
with respect to tne contributions, that they
ha^ fiuled; that the poor workmen have
been ibioed to contribute, under the threat of
being tnmed out of employ; that the army
have been called upon to give a portion of
tbeb pay to carfy on the war, by far the
gyealeal part have peremptorily refused to
contribute to so base a purpose; and the few
that have eoaiplied, have in geneml been ca-
joled or rehmctantly compelled to it Now I
ramark here, that the state of the contribu*
tions of the kingdom, how much hi^ been
•ctnallv oollectMl, what persons had sub*
acribe<L in what part of the kingdom, by what
cbaa of men, workmen, manufacturers, army,
navy, rich and poor, and all descriptions of
men, with the exact sums they ban actually
subscribed, in every part of the kingdom, was
matter of as much public notorieqr as the pub-
lic papers could make it in town and country t
upon tins subject of the contributions, there-
fore, the Executive Directoiy must have been
possessed of the roost accurate intelligence.

My learned Inend stated as to this paper,
that the Adsity of it aggravates its malignancy.
I insist the palpable nusity of it, addressed to
those who must know the falsity, is decisive
evidence, that it was not intended for their
inipeetkm. Would not the Directory have
M% themselves insulted instead of informed,
discouraged instead of encourage, if all the
intelligence that eoukl be sent to induce the
invasion of the kingdom; was such as they
Icnew to be bottomed in&lsehood? In that
way, the argument seems to me to press.

The Executive Directory must have known
that all ranks and descriptions of men had
freely and voluntarily contributed in kid of
the war; and the declaration made in this
naper, by the supposed secret committee of
Enghmd, that the people of England had not
flubscribed, or that their motives were so
and so, could not have obtained credit for a
moment The Act spoke the contrary; the
French must have known thit there were
near two millions actually subscribed, and
ncoUecting'that thehr own ragg»d subscrip-
tions amounted to but a few hiuSreds, would
th^ have considnred this as proof that the
neople of England weie Teady to receive a
mreign ibrcer They most have said, ** why
** do you thus insult us : this may do for the
** vulgareyeLbytweknowthefactoftheactual
^ amount oaiM contributions, all the persons
«< and aU thocfafnimatances connected with it
«• It is matter of pubBe notoriety. Youcome
^ heiepreteoding 10 deceivaualQr stating what

** is notoriously and obviously, to the whole
** world, fiUse. You come attempting to irn*
*' pose upon our creduHtv. You soppose that
** we ate such dupes, as having our ^es upon
** England for months, intending to invade it,
'' that we do not yet know what is the stMeof
** the codimerceof England, what is the state
** of tlie contributions, a fiict known to every
^peasant in France. Do you expect to im-
^ pose upon us with this absurd paper to aid and
^ direct our dedrion on the important mea-
^ sure, whether we shall or shall not invade
^ the kingdom of Great Britain f* Nor ia
this all, eentiemen, I insist, the paper n
upon the nee of it so absurd and ridiculeiis,
that it could not impose upon the credulity of
any man living who reads it throughout, for
every sentence shows the absurdity and folly
ofit

Mark the absurditv,of the ensuing passage,
addressed to men of common sense who are
to read it, *^ The army and the navy, tfad
greatest part have peremptorily refused to
contribute to so base a purpose^ and the few
that have complied, nave in general been
cijjoled or reluctantly compelled to it^ What
with a mayority agamst it, compel the army
to it I Who compels them ? Who can con^l
them to a measure to which they are not
forced by law, to a measure of pure volition?
How absurd, to represent to the Execnttte
Directory of France, that although all the army
and navy, all the strength and force of the king-
dom, are against the subscription, notwith-
stendiog thev are not compelled b^ law to it,
the few that have complieo, have, in general,
been oyoUed or reluctantly compelled to it ( —
Gentlemen, that is so impossible that it caniea
upon the race of it a plain, palpable contra*
diction^ and if addressed to men of common
sense it must instantlv have negatived the
assertion it contains. It could not be other*
wise: it speaks for itself. In a plan of vo-
luntarv oontrilnition some might concur as a
test of their patriotism and attachment; boi
it could not be matter of force ; nor coald It
be believei to be so, by those who must have
known how many large bodies of the army
and navy h%d contrimited.— A mere genetvl
assertion like this from any body, and still
more from such a Ixxly as this, stating such
general, ^Ise, and absurd intelligence as tbis^
could only have defeated itself, and have
prevented any credit being paid to the paper
or the bearers of it.

But, gentiemen, in what follows, there is
still stronger evidence, that this pi^er c«Nili
not possiUy be intended, as is suggeated, Ibr
the use of the Executive Directory of Frmoe.
It is supposed that it was sent for thejrarpoee
,of inviting the Executive Directory or Fhmee
to invade the kinedom ; and to have been
intended to fumisn reasons why Ih^ oi^t
to invade it. I have already obsaved, in
part, on what is stated by way of indUoeuMB^
to the Executive Directoiy of France; ana
how impossible it was for it^ in the lcaa^i»

1409]

far High Treason,

A. D. 1798.

[1410

operate upon the itdnth of any plain sensible
men, examining this paper, and acting widi
ordinary prtideace upbn the subject of it. —
But, let us farthersee, what is the encourage-
ment held out by this [Mtper to the Executive
Directory of France to invade this kingdom ;
in some part of it, it is end^avouredt to be
represented that the people of England are
waiting with anxiety to receive the army of
France upon the coast of England, to co-ope-
rate with them. — ^Now other parts of the
paper cnntun contradictions of^that induce-
ment, so plain and obvious, that it could not
but operate upon any intelligent mind, in a
"way to produce the airectly opposite impres-
sion. And supposing, for a moment, that
this paper had actually been addressed and
carried to the Executive Directory, they
would have said thn is plainly a paper sent by
Tour government to us to deceive us ; it cannot
be sent by any sincere and real firiends of ours.
— ^It must have appeared to be a mere trick
practised upon the Executive Directory, to
induce them to make an attempt which could
not succeed, so ill concealed that it detects
itself.— For what does it tell the Executive
Directoiv of France, upon subjects on which
they had as ample means of information as
the writer of the paper, namely, respecting
the state of parties in this kingdom ? — n
plainfy in>plies, in' the first place, that the
writer of this paper, and whoever is concern^
in it, constitute a distinct party, separated
and detached from all those generally distin-
fished as the principal parties in the king-
'vom. I shall hereafter have occasion to show
how material this is for your consideration in
every point of view. You will observe, it is
quite clear, that the paper is written by some
persons, if written for any public purpose at
all, hostile to all the leading interests in the
kingdom, to all persons of any rank, all of
any worth in the kingdom, all who have
taken any part in public measures ! and that
it is more particularlv pointed against those
persons who have taken the most active part
in the opposition, as it is called, in parlia-
ment. It plainly and nnequivocafly noints
out to France— you are to understana that
we, the writers of this paper, arc a distinct
body, and totally despair or having any one
leader of rank or consequence in the king-
dom; we despair of rtceivine any support
irom those who have taken tbe most active
prt in the public afiairs of the kinniom;
for, with respect to them, we ^rly and
broadly telhyou they are all, to a man, persons
who have mixed in the ranks of thepeople, —
there they will remain ; that not one ofthem
is worthy of the smallest degree of credit or
confidence from us, who write this ; not one
ofthem, from henceforward, to be considered
as otherwise than hostile to us, and conse-
quently hostile to the purpose of this paper.
\ ■ See whether that is not the fiur report made
in this paper ; whether the expressmns, and
whether the principal object of it, if there
VOL. XXVL

were any object in it, be not manifestly cafcu-
lated to do away any hope that the enemy
might have of internal dissentions between
the principal men of the kingdom ; to destroy
any nope they might entertain of countenance
or support, of any sort whatever, from any
person of rank or fortune in the kingdom.
The party, usually acting in support of govern-
ment, France could have no nope or expecta-
tion of being in any respect favourable to
them ; nor would I be understood to imagine
that any body could be foolish enough to
suppose, even without the testimonial of this
paper, that the other greatttnd respectable cha-
racters, to whom I have alluded, could ever be
guilty of a design to countenance or encou-
rage the hostile invasion of this kingdom;
bnt I say, that if the Executive Directoiy, or
any persons in France, could have enter-
tained a delusive hope upon that sublect, that
there existed any one man, among the* mem-
bers of the Opposition, favourable to this
traitorous purpose ; this paper was expressly
calculated to negative sucn a supposition, and
to remove any such hope ; and therefore to
destroy one of the grounds upon which France
could be induced to invade this kingdom;
^ Gentlemen, attend to this passage : " Par-
liamentary declaimers have been the bane of
our freedom ; national plunder was the object
of every faction, and it was the interest of
each '' (without any distinction, observe) '^ t6
keep the people in the dark ; but the delusion
is past. The government has pulled off its
disguise," (mind what follows) << and the very
men, who under the semblance of moderate
reform, only wished to climb into power ^
(clearly persons, therefore, who were not now
in power, and persons who bad been the
favourers of moderate reform) ^ only wished
to climb into power, are now elad to fall into
the ranks of^ the people ! Yes, they have
fallen into the ranks, and there they must for
ever remain ! for Englishmen can never place
confidence in them.'' There is open war de-
clared between the writers of this paper, and
whoever was concerned in it, against all per-
sons of the description alluded to. It goes
on to declare, still more pointedly and strongly,
their disapprobation ofthem, contrasted with
those with whom they (the writers of this
paper) have connected themselves, and from
whom they have hope of assistance. " Al-
ready have the English fraternized with the
Irish and Scots, and a delegate from each
now sits with us." It then expressly states^
with respect to England, <' Fortunately we
have no leader; avarice and cowardice have
pervaded the rich, but we are not therefore
the less united " — written by the poor, I take
for granted, persons who were not themselves
of the description stigmatized—'' Avarice
and cowardice have pervaded the rich, but
we are not therefore the less united ** — we
consequently are not of that description. '

Then it goes on- more decidedly to maifc
out the membra of the Opposition-*'' Some

4X

141 1^ 38 GEORGE III. Trial o/O'Coigfy, O^Qmnor and others [MIS

(ew of the opulent have indeed, by speeches,
professed Miemselves the friends of demo-
cracy ;"—rJ^ow, who can they be? In their
JOter^retationy unquestionaoly, that must be
jdescnptive of those who have made the
strongest public declarations upon an^ subject,
which the writer of this paper com^iderol as
j(ayourable to the friends of democracv; even
with respect to those who have takeq the
^trongest part in their favoiu*, they mea^ to
xieclare th&t they have not the l^ast hopes o/
.any support from them : for tbej go on tp
^latc;— *' but they have not acted, they have
considered themselves as distinct from th^
.jieople, and the people will^ .in its turn, con-
sider their claims to its favour as unjust a^d
/rivolous ; they wish, perhaps, to place hs in
the firont of the battlp. tha^ unsupported bj
the wealth they enjoy, we n|s^ |)erish, wbe^
they may hope to nse upon our ruin.''— Alarlb^
throughout, It is clear, that if the p4p<[r cork^
from .any body of ro^, it is from persons 19
the lowest ranks and descriptions of life;
** they wish, perhaps, to place us iq the front
pf the l»ttle, that, unsupported by the wealth
Ihey enjoy, we may perish, when they may
hope to rise upon oyr ruin.'' Gent)en)en»
attend to this, «< Qut let thein be told, though
we may fall through their criminal QegWci;
they can never hope to rnle, an4 that £«g^
Ushmen, once free, will not. submjt to a
few political impostors." Ijere yow ob^rye

plainly, there is a direct attaek upon §)i thp^
persons, who had taken tb<^ most dtot^ed
and open part, upon any oeca^on, any where«
either in parliament or ofii. of parliai?ienl^
who had any where publicly avowed.seQtIr
Clients ^ost favpiirable to the friendji of
depiQcra^igr s ^1 are indiscrimi|]#tejy give4
Tip ; no^ one leader is to be fpund an^pnj;s|
them ; not one o^an anipnj( them i^ deseryiog
of confidence, they are all swept away in Wf
yndistioguished mass. They are all M/^ic^;
pifppt^fri; persons unworthy of credit, and
who are plainly held put by thia paper, in the
f vent pf a revolutioi) taking plfu^, as deserv*
ing tp he buried in the general wreck and
ruip. NQt,ipdeed» tp be left to the general
fate of others, who have uniforpalv and openly
o^dared their sentiments throughout adverse
p> demoqracy, but they are to be particularly
i;ioticed as impottartf men who had de]ude4
the people, and whp, therefore, in the evept
of any invasion of the kingdom, wppld bjB
particularly marked put to. the vengeance
both of the ene9iy and of their couptiy^— and
particularly of all the. persons, if there w^s
9ny plurality of persons, cpncerned in penn^pg
this idle, foolish, and maiiciou9 paper.

These will, I trust, appear weighty arni-
9ients, to show that the contents of tms
mcr, as applied to an invasion, wonld, if it
had been delivered to the Directory, have led
France to despair instead of hope. It told
them plainly that all ranks of people in this
cfWiliy, al] the men of coi^Muence, wealth,
^c«ee,KndpQwerinit,aUwho hiHl lakea

any part in thepolitics of it, were hostile to
them and hostile to the supposed purpose of
this papeT.«^Is this encouragement to an
enemy to invade the country T How would
any enlightened mind reason upop this ? What
would any persons, iii France, who hs|d bng
been looking at this country, and who had
long known it intimately and accurately,
conclude, on being told, that all the men of
rank, all the men of property^ parties of ail
descriptions are united ; that it is only amongst
the lowest dregs of the community there can
be any possible hope of support ? Could that
be considered as enc9uragjement to an enemy ^
Does it nol^ decidedly intimate to them, give
up your weal^ apd abandoned project; it is aU
over, you can never hope for support here;
iuep of property and rank of sdl parties ai^
equally adverse and hostile tp tne measure of
an invasion ? Is this calcplated to encourage.
Of ^ireptly the reyerse ? t say. that if this
Mper had been delivered t6 tne Executive
X>irectory of France, they must have reasoned
^usuponitt you pretend tp hold out to U9,
ip general terms, tpatyou are friendly to an
mvasipn ; you state conclusions of &ct, about
the contributions, which we ki^ow to be false,
and you state as a motive to encourage us to
invade the country, that all parties who have
any prpperty are against us. A hope, that
they ipigl)t have some leader^ wno was
friendly to ^ invasion, might have aSbrded
some encouragement, but even this iy nega-
tived*—Is it possible that more discouraging
intelligence could be sent ? Musty not the Di-
rectory have instantly known, that in this
great country, where property is, compani-
tively speaking, so equally distributed amongst
all ranks of ipen, that they would have, if
they attempted to execute their wikl project
of an invasion, to coptend, not with one par-
ticular class of men, but with the united
power that -results from the influence, the de-
pendance and the attachment which properly
thus difiiised, creates in thi9 country r— Abut
they not have known, that the instant £o£-
land is united in itself, the instant tbatw
parties and descriptions are united in deteih-
ipiaed hostility to the enemyr not only th^y^
but all the world have known, that England,
thusupited, may bid defiance to the ivorldf
— That it i^ in vain for an enemy to hone thai
when there is a unipn like this, proclaimed
apd declared.bjt those who could have jk> ia*
terest in declaf ipg it, if any spch persws exr
ist as this paper, supposes, in this country,
France n^ust consider invasiea as a forlorn
hope i theyaoe only to, expeet support (rom
pers9i)9» lyhp ppssesf no ppwer, wealth or cod-
sequenqs,. and to be opposed by the men ol*
propervy of all ranks anddeeeriptienat)^u^fa^
put the.Hipgdom.

Geptleqien, I ipnuet entreat younot tpmis-
understand 4he way in whieb I point Ibis* I
do not meap that the pbaenrationtwiflattpoo
this paperi abewing the foily of iL ^ eoap
t11d1bti91y.il commas tbt ai^MiDiir ^ Hf

MS]

Jot Hi^ Trtoion.

A. O. 1796.

tl4l4

contents, sre alone an answer to the charge.
If it was, by other circumstaaoes decisively
proved to be destined to meet the eye of the
Executive Directory of France, aild actuatly to
^e delivered to them ; — ^whatever may be the
contents or effect of it, whether it would es-
tentddly tend, to encourage or to discourage
the invasion ;— yet, if it was intended to be
shown to the Executive Directorsr of France,
in order for them to exercise their judgment
upon itj although they would have drawn the
conclusions I have pointed out, I do not mean
to argae that it would not be treason to carry
it to them for thb purpose.— My argument is,
that there being no positive evidence to prove
that this paper was destined for the eye of
the Directory, no positive evidence that there
was anv previous plot, any conspiracy, any
body of misn assembled for the purpose of
communicating with, or sending intelligence
to France ; there beins lio evidence to prove
that even an ordinary aegree of caution was
used with respect to the paper, but every at-
tendant circumstance* showing the negative ;
••-under such circumstances, we contents of
the paper ought to have great weight in dis-
proving the cnarge of its alleged destination.
All the circumstances taken together, the
conl^ts of the paper, the place where it was
found, the circumstances attending the care of
it, the absence of positive proof on the part of
tb^ prosecution, all speak together that it must
have been an idle paper, not of the nature, nor
intended for the purposes charged in this in-
dictment. ' If tiiis should be your belief, there
is an end of the indictment for that is the
point upon which the whole rests.

I have assumed, in what I have been now
arguing, that the paper was actuallv found in
the pocket of the great coat, and that that
great coat did actually belong to Mr. 0*Coigly.
If I had been in any respect disposed to put
tbis case upon little circumstances, I mi^ht
have gone into some observations respecting'
the testimony that has been given upon that
subject— I might have observed upon the
manner in wnich the persons conducted
^emselves with respect to the finding this
]>aper, and the inconsistency in the testi-
hiohy given on the part of the Crown.
Two Witnesses ft-om Bow-street have spoken
of the findinj^ it, and the place where
Ihey first took it out of the pocket, wbich
was expressly stated by one* of them, it
not by^ both, not to be in tiie presence of th^
prisoner ; but that it was actually, for the first
time^ taken out of the great-coat pocket in a
room wherem the only persons present were
the two Bow-street oracersand Mr. Twopeny
tbe attorney. Mt. Twopeny, the attorney,
ytrisLS dnlM, and swore the direct contrary. He
has positively sworn, that though he cameafter
the prisoners were arrested, yet he came into
l9ie room where the great coat was, and he
tfdtually saw the pocket-book taken out of th^
^reat-coat pocket in the presence of the pri-
soners; Upon this subject, therefore, fnere

t

certainly is a direct contradiction between
Twopeny and the other witnesses examined
on the part of the Crown-

[Mr. Plumer was informed by the Court thaJt
he had mistaken the evidince—that their
testimony was uniform upon that circum'
stance,^

Mr. Plumer.^I am thankful for the cor-»
rcction— I was not going to lay any kind of
stress upon it, but onlv m^de the observation
with a view to a principle, the truth of which
is edually proved by another circumstance
whioi occurred in the course of the evidence
on another 5ui)ject. You recollect, gentlemen,
that a woman was examined for the pnrposd
of identifying: one of the gentlemen at th»
bar; she gave her evidence positively and
distinctly at first ; on being asked whicn was
the person that came to Canterbury on Sun^
day night, she pointed out Mr. O'Connor po-»
sitively to be the person. Afterwards she waa
desired to come up nearer to him, and agaitf
^inted him out, and swore positWely to the
feet; but Mr. Garrow having mentioned th^
name of the person so pointed out to be Mr;
O'Connor, and the witness by that ittean^
finding that she must have made a mistake,
instantly corrected her «Jvidence, and fixed
upon the gentleman standing next to him *
and it is notorious arid admitted, that Mr.
Binns, and not Mr, 0'Cc)nnor,"was the person.
The evidence of this witness is I know, struck
out, and will not be summed up to you ; but
I maktf the observation for the purpose of
showing with what caution you ought to re-
ceive little circumstances, that are cotteded
together for the purpose of raisJng a presump-
tion, and an inference of guilt.

Another circumstance has been given upotf
evidence, which I presume, is meant to be
reKed upon, and wnicli likewise shows how
extremely cautious you ought to be in relyJng
upon evidence, such as has been brought to^
day, collecting together little cirtumsUuces of
probability and presumption, to press agsdnst
men to the extent of their lives. Papersrhavo
been spoken to generally by persons declaring
their belief of their b^ing the hand-wrrting of
the prisoner— a testimony often given veiy
rashly, even if not from persons in the suspi-
cious situation, to say no worse of him^ of
Mr. Dutton, but who often draW very rash
conclusions upon the subject of hand-writing.
Papers are by that means provied, and men
made responsible to the extent of their lives,
by a single witness coming and saying, he
verily beheves the paper to be the hand- writ-
ing of the person under accusation.

A paper has been produced, supposed to be
a letter of Mr. O'Connor's. Mark, gentle-
men, the dangerof relying upon circnmstinces,
proved by witnesses very frequently, who
certainly do not intend to misrepresent the
truth, who come bona fide to declare what they
believe to be true, but who yet give testimony
too* rashly aild petcmptorily, upon a subject

1415] 38 GfiOKQE m. Trial of (y£oi^y, O'Contmanaothen [1416

•

affectiog a man's life. Such was the OASe mth
Mr. Lane, upon whom I do not mean to east
any imputation ; Mr. Lane undoubtedly bad
good opportunities of being conversant with
tne hand-writing of Mr. Oxlonnor ; he came
here and gave evidence respecting it, and I do
not suspect he intentionally meant to say any
thing that was not true. All that I mean to
state isy the estreme danger, when men are
upon trial for their lives, of relying upon such
sort of testimony, even when given by men
who are the most fairly dispos^. Here is a
letter read against Mr. 0-Connor|is his letter^
it is proved to be so by Mr. lime. Now, gen-
tlemen, suppose that this letter had been »
letter of more moment than it is. — It is urged
as one circumstance against Mr. O'Connor,
connecting him with Mr. O'Coigly .--Suppose
it had been a oaper of still more importance,
the learned judge, in summing up that evi*
dence to you, would have stateu this of course,
as testimony given against Mr^ O'Connor, po-
aitively proving it to be his hand-writing; and
if Mr. O'Connor could not have proved the
reverse (which it is extremely difficult to do,
unless he happens to know whose letter it is ;
in the case of a letter only signed by initials,
and those not easily made out) ; what must
have been the consequence. It would have
been said, Mr. O'Connor only says it is not
his letter, but he does not prove that it is not
bis ; and it is proved on the part of the prose-
cution, that it is his— you must in that case
have taken it into your consideration as un-,
contradicted evidence against him. Suppose
upon this paper, thus proved, you had brought
in your verdict of guilty, and had sentenced
Mr. O'Connor to death. Gentlemen, you
would have been very soon in the distressing
situation stated by lord Hale. Every one of
vou probably would have had reason to recol-
lect with regret, to the latest moment of your
lives, the unfortunate verdict you had given.-—
This letter was actually written by a witness,
whom 1 will call, and who will prove to you,
that it was written without the least know-
ledge, without the least privity, of Mr. O'Con-
nor. What would you have felt if you had
convicted Mr. O'Connor upon such a paper,
in consequence of the hand-writing being
proved, by even a respectable witness, who
spoke to the bestof his knowledge and belief?
If this Ijad been pressed to connect Mr.
O'Connor with the paper in question, which
it is in part, and this had more pointedly con-
nected nim with it, what would you and the
world have said, if aAer you had pronounced
your verdict, and Mr. O'Connor had in con-
sequence of that verdict suflfered death, the
seal state of the fact which had not been
known at the time, had been afterwards acci-
dentally discovered, as in the case stated by
lord Hale, where, after persons had been exe-
cuted, in three instances irrefragable evidence
appeared,, negativing the ground upon which
they had been convicted. If it had been after-
wards discovered that this gentleman had not

been in the kingdom at the time, but was in
Ireland, and thmfore tliat it could not pos-
sibly have been written by him, anid this cir-
cumstance bad formed an ingredient in your
mind to have convicted Mr. O'Connor, and
sentenced him to death, what would you ail
have said ? what would the world have said ?
The same observations apply to the testimony
given respecting identity of person, if itbad
not been aetected, in the instance of the .wo-
man, who on her positive oath pointed out
Mr. O'Connor to be the man who came to,
Canterbury on the Sunday night, which he
iinquestionably was not.

You see the extreme danger of relying upon
this sort of .evidence, and still more on pre-
sumptions built upon it, and little circum*
stances tending. to impUoite a man in those
foul crimes, the punishment pf which is so
dreadful and severe.

But, eentlemen, I do not mean .to trouble
you wiUi a farther detail of all .the minute
circumstances that belong to this pact of the
case. I have probably opiitted niany ; .but as
far as respects, this, head of the subject, I shall
entirely leave it with you ; ai:^ defects, of mine»
and very many I am conscious of, will be well
suppliea bv the gentlemen who follow me, and
still more by the learned judges who are ulti-
mately to sum up the case.

.1 shall submit to you, upon this first poin^
the proof of which must he made the founda-
tion of a. verdict of guilty against all, or any
of the prisoners, that there is .not a sufficient
ground established by .the evidence, to induce
a jury to pronounce^ that this paper, in
whosever possession it was found, and by
whomsoever it was intended to be carried out
of the kingdom, was certainly sent for the
purpose, and intended .to be. delii^ered to the
Execi^ve Direftqiy of Frimce. There is no
clear and positive evidence affirmatively to
prove that first proposition; and I rely upon the
contents, of the paper and the drcomstances
under which it was found, as affi>rding reason-
able and fair evidence to the contraqr. Under
these cirpumstances, I submit that it cannot
but be admitted to be matter of doubt at least,
whether it was so intended or not ; and sup-
posing it to be matter of doubt, it will not be
denied that the inevitable consequence is,
that it must produce a verdict of acquittal ;
because you are not, in a doubtful case, to
hazard a contrary verdict, which is to be at-
tended with consequences so l^ghly penal.

Gentlemen, it is however necess^, on be
half of one of the gentlemen for whom I ap-
pear, Mr. O'Connor, that I should detain you
a very short time longer, .to point out the cir-
cumstances which relate personally to him,
for the purpose of showinj; that it is not pos-
sible he could have the design imputed to him,
that he eould liave intend^ to be the bearer
of this p^per, to carry it to the Exectitive
Directory of France, for the purpose of invit-
ing the invasion of England. To prore that
he did so, there is not, on the perl of the

1417]

Jqt High Treason*

A. D. 17d8.

[1418

crown, oae single tiHle of direct and positive
evidence ; I say, gentlemen, there is not, be-
cause I do not consider the general evidence
on the other part of the case, proving in him a
purpose to go abroad, a purpose to go abroad
m the company of others, a purpose to go se-
cretly out of the kingdom, which I have al-
ready expluned to have been done, with a
view of avoiding the dancer that pressed upon
bim ; this I do not consider as direct, oevtain
^ evidence, pointedly applying to this part of
* the case, or as connecting him with the indi-
vidual paper in auestion. I am sure you will
feel that a hunored cases may be stated, in
which persons may form a plan to go out of
the kingdom together, and yet it by no means
follows that they are all going, after they have
leA the kingdom, to the same place, or for the
same purpose ; a variety of different circum-
stances induce men to a change of country-^
danger, dislike to the place they are in, busi-
ness, amusement, attractions in the place to
which the;|r intend going; several persons
may agree in wishing to leave the country in
which they are, without looking forward to
the same object, or intending ultimately to
confine themselves to the same spot. One
man is going to Holland, another to France,
a third to Switzerland, a fourth to Italy, and
90 on; all the party splitting and dividing the
instant they have got abroad, yet all wishing
to get out of the kingdom.

Again, there may be four or more persons
united in a plan of going out of the kingdom,
each having his own motive for leaving it;
one, for instance, may be going for his heiSth ;
another, for fear of bus creditors; a third, be-
cause he apprehends that a charge may be
made against him for any crime committed ;
a fourth, merely for purposes of amusement;
a fifth, for purposes of public or private busi-
ness. They would all be united in an inten-
tion of going into parts beyond seas, and
might all, for that purpose, take a coach or
vessel together, and go abroad together.
What then ? Is it to be inferred, because they
leave the kingdom together, that they have
all the same motive, the same place of desti-
nation, the same ultimate object. No, cer-
tainly, it concludes nothing with respect to
the motive of each individual, proving only
many to be going away in one company; and
proving the intention of any individual of the
company to be of a treasonable or other cri-
minal nature, or that he had committed any
crime for which he was flying from the coun-
try, burglary, murder, or the like ; that he
had been engaged in a duel, or done any thing
else, the consequences of which were highly
penal; proving, I say, any of these to be his
reason for going, does not prove that it is
mine, who so with him, or that of any other
person who happens to be of the company.
Where, therefore, evidence is given of a per-
sonal and individual motive, it would be the
fashcst conclusion in the world to press that
against any more than the persoa woose mo-

tive it is, merely because they have agreed to
go abroad with him, and are found in company
with him.

To a certain degree they may be said to be
united in design, viz. in one common wish to
go out of the kingdom, and they may be far-
ther united in the same wish that their de-
parture should be private, each for a different
reason; but what is the motive of ope is not
the motive of another ; what is the motive
of Mr. O'Connor, for instance, is not the mo-
tive of Leary his servant; the master goes for
his own business, the servant to follow his
master. One gentleman goes out of the coun-
try because he has taken part in the politics
of another country, that makes it unsafe for
him to remain in it; another may be in-
fluenced by any other of the various motives
I have suggested. Apply this reasoning to
the present case — Four natives of Iremnd
are found going together out of this kingdom
privately, and so far they are proved to be con-
nected together; but it does by no means
fairly and reasonably lead to the conclusion,
that the motive of one, if proved to be im-
proper, was the motive of the others. I do
not mean to state that there may not be cir-
cumstances to connect them as to purpose and
motive, but I trust I have shown, that merely
connecting them in the purpose of the voy-
^$^9 or journey, is perfectly inconclusive as to
the charge of a traitorous conspiracy. If
there were specific proof that one of them was

foing to France for the purpose charged, yet
is individual intent is not, standing alone, to
be considered as proper evidence oi the mo-
tive, object, or destination of the rest; still
less is it capable of being so pressed in the
case of a treasonable act, such as the present
is supposed to have been, which is more na-
turally the act of one than of many, and where
the evidence properlv fixes it uppn one only,
to the exclusion of the rest.

A paper is found, under circumstances that
properly confine the responsibility for it solely
and personally to an inaividual : I take it, if
there is any proposition established in the
usage of common life, it is that every man is
alone responsible for the contents* of his own
pockets. If it were not so, consider what
would be the consequence ? If any one could
be convicted of a crime, by being made an-
swerable for the contents of another man's
pockets, no man could safely go in company
any where with another, and certainly not
pnvately, without saying, Let roe first examine
your pockets ; you must let me see the con-
tents of your coat, waistcoat, and breeches
pockets ; Jiay, to be perfectly safe, he-must go.
farther, and say. Strip to your shirt; for if you.
have any thing about you any where, I dooiot
know but I may be made responsible for it.
He must see all the luggage of his fellow-tra*.
veller, and ransack every thing belonging to
him, before he could safely go out of the.
kmgdom in his company ; — for Mr. O'Connor
was hanged at Maiostonei because he wen|

1419] 38 GEORGB III. Trial oJOHM^y, ffConfut and others \liSQ

in compooy with a man whose pockets he had
not examined. |If such a doctrine were to
prevail, any man who is in future going out
of the kin^om with another, or travelling
with him. within the kinedom, must use the
precaution I have stated, at the i>eril, if he
does noty of being made responsible for the
contents of the trunk or other package, the
pockets and podcet-book of hb companion.
This can nerer be seriously stated. Where
SAT article is found in the pocket of an-
other, the proper inferasce is, if there be no
Mdenee to early it farther, that it is exclusive
personal possession in him atone. It attaches
individually WoA personally on him, and it is
inhisaolepossesston; he alone is to be called
vpon lb explain it, he alone i9 to be respon-
atbto for it, unless there be some other ef^h-
denoe l» make any body else responsibkf. It
throws upon tliose who wish to extend the
acsponsibility to Mtiers, the onus probandi;
prhnft facie, a paper so fbund exdudee the
idea of any participatton and oo-operation in
any other person; I sa^, primA fade, it is Co
be considered as not being in the possesion
of any body other than the individual in wfaoSe
VDoket it was found, though eertainly it may
be made out otherwise/ by extrinsic circum-
stances.

IM OS sM, Aen, what other evidence there
is to rebut this presumption, am) tb show that
Mr. OXk>nnor was any way connected with
tlug paper. It might hare been proved, that
though the paper was found onlv in posses-
sion of one, yet that the rc^t, and in pardcu^
lar Mr. O'Connor, had' actually seen the pa-
per, that he had reakl it, that he had compoised
It, that it is in his hand-writing, that he had
be«n in codkpany When it Was written, that it
had heed read etef to him.- le there any
evidence ef th&t sort? Ha»' tbene been a'
ihigle «4tnfess called to suggest that Mr.
O'Connor ever saw H in his fife till it wa^

Kuted ih this court } Is there any the
evidence that he ewr hcartl of it^ th^t it
was'ever read to him, that it Wte ever Atiy
pMt of ii comuiutticated to htm? Is
there the smallest tittle of evidence, Oil the
part of the piNOsecution, to this clftcti Here
1% alt the presumption of the paper's betong-
ing to another, and proof of its beine in pos-
session of anothei", and not t tittle ofj>ositivb
•videttdft to prove that Bfr. O'Goniior ever
Um\\^ heard of it, or had ever the oofltait»
of it communicated to him in his life. Are
y^u to presume this without, and agidnst evi-
dencel The gravest and wisest authorities
Iftave said you ought to pause, in a case of life,
0ittk wftiere thei^ is some evidence, to be cau-
tious hdw you adopt presumptions against any
liiati. ' How,thenj can you venture to pre-
same, without any evidence, that Mr. O'Con-
nor kncfW thts'papcr was in the pocket of Mr.
©^Coigly, and that he Was intending to carrjr
il to the Ex^otive Directory of France P It
\i impossible for Mr. OT^onnor to prove iStaX
li« knew nothing ofit. Though that be true,

he cannot prdve it, because a negiGve does
not admit of proof. If the chaq;e were made
against any one of you, who had unfortunately
been in the company of these persons, goio|(
abroad with them, it would have been im-
possible for you to give positive evidence to^
negative your connection with the paper. You
could onty have said, I never saw the paper,
never hesra of it in my life, I knew nothing
what this man bad ifl hb pocket-book or
great-ooat pocket : prove that I ever saw it; ,
heard of it, or that the contents ever were
oommunifcated to me. If the prosecutor did
not eive Sdch proof, as be certainly ha» not
itk this ease, you wilt surely think it lugust
to be <Bonvkted upon presumptions, without
any proof of actual knowledge.

what other evidence has been adduced tor
pfove Mr. O'Connor kneW of this paper f
Why, it is said Mr. OX^onnor was one of^this
compBtfiy s that after he was mpprehetkled, he
disavowed hb knowledge of ant of them r
that he did not Acknowledge the bamge, and
that he said what was not true with respect
to the destination of his voyage. I have al-
ready stated what, I trust, you will considei^
as a fair and reasodable ground, for an indul-
gent construction of what a man unguard^dhr
says in the moment of alarm, oppressed with
tbte apprphension of being sent to eaol, on ^
hesfvy a charge as the present; i trust you'
will think it ought not to be pressed farther
than to infer a donseiousness in Mr. O'Connor
that h^ was doing what he had no right to do,'
which mflst certainly be admitted to have
been the fkct. He had not a right to go out
of the kinedoin without a licence ; that will
account wh v this gentleman M not conduct
himself With that candour and prudence which
he oueht to have used, stod the frank dlsck>-
sure or every thing that belonged to tiieafiair.
He knew he was attempting what was-fbr-
faMien by law, and from what he had endured
ifrlrdand, he dreaded the dangfr of anothef
iolprisombent He was alarmed', and had no
fHebd XS advise 6r direct him ; he knew that
soitte of his companions were suspected iiin-
tives likd himself; but to infer, because ne*
aeted in liie imprudent manner which has been
shown;. itiHhe aisavowal of those coinpaidons,
and the concealment of the destination of his"
v<oyagfc, that he was concerned in, or knew
the contents of thb paper, seems to mc to be
sr most rash and unjustifiable conclusion.

It is farther stated that Mr. OConnor dM'
not acknowledge tiie baggage^. Mr- Attonhey'
General said, Whtft f noi own Baggan so va-
luable— property so considerable r What can
that b« owing to but euih?

In the first plkce, imx reason was theMfr fat
Mr. O'Connor's- not acknowledging thiifb^-'
gtige, when ta tUi^ bamge £ere b not a*
sibgkftbli^g found to a^rd any proof ti|;sftistf
hihi: Air these cI6thes, the money, antf ottar
atrticles of cot^seuuenccf, that werefbottd^wty^'
it u askedi should not ne own Aem? and vov
to draw siiD inlerence fim nr

14SI]

fat High Treoicn*

A. D. 1*708.

[14SS

ciraumstancey and impute guilt to him. But
what is to be imputed or imerred from hence ?
If you mean that it is a ctrcumstance to show
his reluctance to be identified in person^ that
is negatived by the evidence, that the mo-
ment he came up to Bow-street, upon beins
asked his name, he acknowledged it. With
respect, too, to his denial of his nagsaget I do
not observe, in the examination of Mr. O'Con^r
nor, given in evidence, that he does deny it
He says, the keys have been out of my poSi-
aetsion, tilings may have been put into it smce
it has bees taken from me, and therefore I
do np'r choose to be responsible for it, and, on
the co'htrary, he distinctly claims the money,
states that it it his, and he also claims the
property in the basgage. The fact, therefore,
of a supposed disclumer, on bis part, of the
bagg>ge, totally fiuls, and the inference, of
course, with it.

The next circumstance relied upon is a
letter of Mr. O'Connor's, written to my lord
Edward Fitq^rald^ which was found in
lieinster^house, in the apartments of lord
Edward Fitzgerald. You have heard It read ;
what does it prove? Why, Mr. Attorney-
General says, tnat in this letter he indicates,
with respect to himself, an intention to go to
Williams, which Williams is, by the cypher,
he says, made out to be France ; and he like-
wise speaks of getting Maxwell off; he talks
of Nicnolson and her set, of the black terrier^
and BO on; which are evidently, says the
attomey-gcaaeral, mysteries, not meaning
what tney appear to mean, but having some
other meaning. What then ? why, says he,
it is incumbent on Mr. OXJonnor to explain
them. Well, and if he does not, what tnen ?
Why then it remains a mvstery, and because
it is a mystery, it must be treason. If it is
not explained it is mystery, and all that is a
mysteiy the prosecutor has a right to say is
necessarily treason. Why so^ gentlemen f
Are you to follow these mystenous interpre-
tations, and to take upon yourselves to hazard
B conviction, when yon are left in a state of
mysterv and doubt? Are you to take for
granted, that Nicholson and her set roust
mean some other person, and then at random
to interpret whom in particular the expres-
sion does mean? It does not appear who
Maxwell is, therefore you are desired to con-
clude it must mean (yCoisly. Is there
any evidenee to prove that ne ever went
by that name, or any circumstance to ooiw
neCt him with it f Mr. Attorney General
says, it is incumbent upon Mr. O^onnor to
explain this. Give me leave, in the first
filace, to request the b mefit of the Observa-
tions made in the begiuliing of my address,
that I am not on the part of the prisoner,
charged with so heavy a crime, bound to ex-
plain at all. I have a right to maintain a
•ullen silence^ to say for him, I am not guilty;
it remains for you, the prosecutor, to prove
me so. If I do not explain any letter or
fap^yit must be left to speak for itself, H

you can, either by internal evidence of its
contents, or from other circumstances, explain
it, and ascertain with certainty that the mean-
ing is a^nst me, you are entitled to the
e&ct of It; but mere non- explanation on the
part of the accused, is not a ground which
can aid or fix the evidence given on the part
of the prosecution. The prisoner's ex plana*
tion might contradict it, but his. silence can*
not hem it. Let me ask, too, whether it ia
reasonable, if Mr. O'Connor gives no expla*-
naJdon of this letter to lord Edward Fits^erald^
to conclude to the extent against him, to
which it has been pressed by Mr. Attorney-
GeneraL

Does this letter constitute any part of the
char^ a^nst Mr. O'Connor? Had he the
least notice till yesterday that it was to be
produced agunst him? Had he before the
smallest idea of such a letter? and yet he
is expected instantly to be prepared, not only
with an explanation, but with proof in answer
to it, for his own personal explam^n ia
nothing. Is it reasonable, because he ia
not abM to explain the contents of i^ letter,
which does not constitute any part or
the known charge against him— because be
is not able, when surprised by the sudden
production of a letter written to a gentlemaa
m another kingdom, and plainly relating to
persons and things in another kingdom^is il
reasonable to adopt the prosecutor's arbttmry,
unproved interpretation, and upon the strength
of It to convict Mr. O'Connor ? I insist it ia
not reasonable. If the prosecutor had meant
to press for a conviction upon this letter, it
should, if possible, have been introduced into
the charge, or some notice should have been
given *of it, and the explanation of it de-
manded. The prosecutors have had it ia
their possession from the time it was first
found m Leinster house ; they have had op-
portunities which we have not had, to explam
and to prove all the drcumslances belonging
to it. They long iuiew of this letter, I dii
not. Am I then to have pressed against roe^
that I give no evidence to explain mystery,
when Uiey give no evidence to prove that
that mystery hM the meaning which they
put upon it P I say, that if the inquiry con«
ceming this letter ends in mystery, it ends ia
doubt; and in a doubtful case you certainly
are not to adopt the meaning which makes
against the accused, rather than that which
makes for him.

But with respect to this letter, how does it
in any part connect Mr. O'Connor with the
paper round in the great-coat pocket? Ia
that letter Mr. O'Connor is writing confides-
tially to lord Edward Fitzgerald. Is there
one word of intimation that he is proposing^
or concerned in anv plot here, to invite aa
invasioa of England P that he is employing
any person for such a purpose, that he is
himself to be the bearer of any intelligence
for such a purpose, or that he is to accompany
any person who b going abroad for that pur-

14S5] 3S GEORGE III. Trial of O'Caigly, ff Connor and othert [1424

posef Can any such meaning be collected
from this letter? which, by-tbe-by, is a letter
without any (late; and when written, and
what it relates to is altogether lefl unexplained
by the prosecutor. From the way in which
this Maxwell is mentioned, it is plain he was
not a person to accompany Mr. O'Connor,
for the letter speaks of getting him off. I
say therefore, that throughout this letter,
there is nothing in any part of it that neces-
sarily, or by fair inference, connects Mr.
O'Connor with the purpose, or manifests the
intent imputed, viz. that he was concerned
in a plot to procure an invasion of England.
But there is a fair inference to be drawn to
the contrary, from the silence of the letter on
that subject, though written in confidence, in
the most undisguised manner, to his friend
lord Edward Fitzgerald. You observe that
it relates altogether to measures in Ireland,
and respects another kingdom, and not this.
AW that he says in it, respecting England, is
nothinff^more than the common observation
of a gentleman residing at the time in this
country, and remarking upon the state of it
in general terms, a^ any individual, casually
resident here, might have done to a friend in
another kingdom. I contend, therefore, that
as far as we can get at the contents and
^IneaninK of this letter, there is nothing to
prove Mr. O'Connor concerned in any plot to
invade England, and that it throughout shows
his mind was wholly intent upon the affiairs
of Ireland. It can never, therefore, fairly,—
whatever ground it may be said to afford for
an^ other impuation upon Mr. O'Connor,
which is not the subject to-day, — it can never
be fairly applied to the question now undev
consideration, viz. whether he was concerned
in carrying this paper to France, to invite an
invasion of England; for throughout that
letter there is not any one passage that inti-
mates, or is expressive of any such intent.

One passage in it has been much relied
upon, wherein be says be is going to WUliamM
Xwhich the prosecutor says is France), and
that he means to be active there. Now I
will assume that Williams means France;
what then? I mean to be active there;
active, how? What do you mean to do?
Active in public or in private business ? That
is not said. Oh, we roust therefore suppose
it to be public business, and that public bu-
siness you must infer to be treasonable busi-
ness, and that treason you must conclude to
be treason directed against England. Whyf
because whenever a man states that he is
going to France, and intends to be active
there, you must necessarily conclude he
means to be active in a treasonable corres-
pondence against England. Is not this
Btraining the meaning of a sentenccy which
only imports some intended activity, without
fixipK what? It might relate to business
wholly private, to the private concerns of lord
Edward Fitzgerald, who had married a French
lady, and might have a hundred concerns of

a private nature, which Mr. O^onnor might
have undertaken to transact for him there.
It might relate to activity of any kind what-
ever ; and unless it is proved to be activity of
the nature stated hi the charge, all that you
can make of it is, that it is leU in doubt what
it alludes to, and therefore you can form no
certain conclusion about it. Observe, if a
contrarv reasoning were to prevail, what
would be the effect with respect to the act,
which prohibits any person going into France.
If any man goes into France secretly, he is
liable, under that act, to suffer six months
imprisonment, on being convicted of that
misdemeanor ; but if it is proved that besides
going to France, he meant to be active there,
ttien it is treason; so tliat act could only
apply to a person who meant to do nothing
when he got to France; and as to any man
who meant to be active there, he must intend
treason. Now no man would go out privately
to France without some reason for it, and
therefore every secret departure which, under
the act, amounts only to a misdemeanor,
must, with the addition of a mere intimation
that he means to be active, in some thing or
other, be converted into high treason. I
submit that no such inference can fairly
arise against Mr. O'Connor from that circum-
stance.

Some observations have been made respect-
ing his dress, his money, his baggage, and all
the more minute articles of property, that are
now spread out before you, with a view, I
suppose, to induce stronger suspicions in your
minds, of the guilt of Mr. OX^onnor ; but how
can such in any respect bear upon this part
of the ca8e?-^That he was going abroad,
clearly appears from his exaroinatioia, and
many other circumstances; and more than
that, all this apparatus docs not seem to me
to prove. With respect to his taking with
him abroad the money that is proved, why
any gentleman going to sta^ for any time,
would of course take money tor that purpose.
It cannot be supposed to be money for any
other purpose; It is not a sum that conld be
designed for procuring active assistance from
abroad; nor is it possible to suppose, that
Mr. O'Connor, a fugitive from his own coun--
try, and who had transferred away all his
property there, was in a situation to go with
pecuniary means of bribing, or corrupting,
France, to take part in the invasion of Eng-
land. The money was destined for his own
purposes, while he continued abroad, during
the distractions of his country. If this gen*
tleman had been going in the pay of France,
he did not want any money. I take for granted
they would have paid such a convert to trea-
son pretty handsomely. It is plain he de-
pended upon himself, and therefore he took
this money for his su[^rt.

Gentlemen, excepting this, the* only ex*
trinsic circumstances uf^ against Mr.CrCoift
nor are, that he is seen in company. witb Mr.
O^Coigly, before they set off, dioei with him

I4S5] J9r High Treason.

af *lf r. BelFsy calls him bjr the name of Jones;
and af^w^ras lays that hit name is O'Coiglj^;
upon thaty I shall detain you but a few mi-
nutes, because it seems to me, that these
circumstances are already comprehended in
the general obsermtions I have made. They
raerdy tend to show, that he was induced to
act towards Mr. Ot^oicly^ as Mr. Bell has
stated — ^that Mr. Ot^iglv (who certainly was
in Ireland accordlne lo the letter the prose-
cutor has prddttcedy the 14th of January,
V9Sf and ddes not appear, by any evidence,
to hiv6 arrived here, till about ten days
before be 'sist 6S) had recently come from
Ireland and appeared, as Mr. Bell stated, to
be a new acquaintance of Mr. O'Connor's;
both intending to f» abroad, they agree to go
toftether^ and to t&e the means of concealing
this desiipi; that is all that is proved byit;
Knd thai IS perfectly consistent with the case
I have already stated.

'* Gentlemen, I shall only just observe here,
with respect to Mr. O'Connor, that there is
not the least proof ne had any previous ac-
quaintance with one of the persons, who is
supposed to be a co-coospirator with him in
this plbt, 1 mean the nrisoner of the name of
Allen ; you observe there is no proof of any
previous kndwledg^; and the fact is, that he
never saw Allen in his life, prior to then-
meeting in the Whitstable hoif : and yet it is t
taken for granted, that he iii willing to entrust
bis life in the hands of this stranger, of infe-
rior situataoB of life, and to be a conspirator
vrith him and his own servant— He who had
flttflered so much from suspicions against him
inandther opunfry, is supposed to be so in-
different about imnnsonment, and so careless
of lifey as to trust himself in the hands of this
mistellaneous party, upon an embassy like
this.*

' Gentlemen, I will not detain you longer on
thuhead. I trust I have shown you, thAt
there ate no extrinsic drcumstances adduced
ID pnio^ on the part of the prosecutor, to
briw this paper home to Mr. (^Cunnor, or to
render him responsible for it. I have only
BOW to observe^ what evidence is afforded by
the contents of the paper itself as applied to
this sutgect, and in that I shall show not only
that they produce no evidence agunst Mr.
O'Coimor, but the most decisive native of
any connexion with it, on the part of Mr.
O^Cohnor. Gentlemen upon this subject, I
hope I shall only detun you a very few mt>-
ments longer— I am extremely sony to have
trespassed upon your time, and that of their
lordships so lone. I only request your in^
diligence a veiy tew minutes, while I point
out, as material for your consideration, a pas-
sage, I have before 'reisd firom this pa|ier,
ten£ng to reflect upon the confidential friends
of thisMr. OX^nnor, ,who is charged to be
coneetned in it. Negrtivefy I say, that on
the' part of „the prosecution, they have not
proved asunst Mr. O'Connor, that he was
connected with the supposed author of the
VOL. XXVI.

A. D. 179d. [1426

paper, or with any society from whence it is
supposed to have issued. — As far as any evi'
dence goes, it is negatived by his not beloi^g-
ine to any society at all.

Now, gentlemen, if I prove to you posi-
tively, on the part of Mr. O'Connor that
he was connected most closely and inti-
mately with all the persons, who are the' sub-
ject of attack in thisoaper; and. that there is
all the evidence whicn the nature of the sub-
ject can admit, negatively, that he is- not
connected with the party who wrote . it; it
seems to me impossible that the contents of
any puier can more clearly evince in both
ways, lor the accused, and against theacco-
sation.— When men read any iMiper^ they
generally draw their inferences, wifh respect
to the author, from the style of the imputed
author, if they aro conversant with it; — 6r
from his habits and connexions in -life, th^
judge how hf it is jmbable he can be con«
nected with any particuUur conifiositk>n.-i^
Judging by this criterion, could Mr. OXJonnor
have hSoa the author, or in any respect privy
to a paper of this sort now beron you?
' Under the first head, I shall content myself
with referring to the. evidence, and observa-
tions before made, completelv negativing^ all
connexion with the supposed writers of thia
paper. Under the second, I shall presently
cau many of those, gentlemen who are- the
principal objects of attack in this paper, the
gentlemen connected witli oppoutlon, whom
It distinguishes as men who have deserted
the cause of liberty, and exposes as propdr
btgecto of the vengeance, ana resentment of
invading France. ' Gentlemen, I request df
you to consider what was Mr. O'CbnnoHs si-
tuation, and reflect upon this, as if it wei<e a
business of common life, and tiy whether
there is not the mo^t convincing proof of my
argument. If you will favour me with your
attention for a veryfew moments, I think I
sludl be able to satis^ every one of you, by
the most decisive cnterions, fortunately for
the vindication of truth and innocence, ev«r
occurring in a court of iustice from the
tvidentia ret, the paper itself, the most decr-
sive proof to negative Mr. O'Connor's bemg
the author of it, connected with or approving
of it, upon eveiy possible hypothesis that can
be adopted. - Suppose him only to possess
the feeungs of a man, to have a heart acce^
sible to the common motives which ^vem
human nature. Weigh ever^r moliye that
can 6pemte upon the human inind. Suppose
him even to mve been governed by interested
motives; put it, that he 4s she basisst creature
that ever existed, thsit he is looking only t6
his own good; advancein'ent, or einolumen^
in any way in which the ease can be viewed.
I say tliis paper' presents the most decisive
negative to the suppositioli, that any man' in
the ciKumstances of Mr. OfCbnnor, and act-
ing upon any motive that can be suggested,
coukl possibly have been the author <Mr it, or
in any way coneetned in it. _
4 Y

I4S0 38 GEORGE bl. Trial i^ffCm^^.V Connor and Mm. [1498

firiebdy of the' cause he profeksed to mtfupoft,
Gentletneii) I will not tresposs aoy longer
on^foiir ttme'^I tAd p^fnuoded I fntitnoii nir-
ther urge tbe impoafeiMlhy of If r. (^ConDor
beiog the aulbwof, or in any respect pri^y Ho
the paper ift question, if it ww designed to be
delivered by any body to the E&ecutive Df-
rectory o({rAnce.

I beg pardon lor haviQe detathed you and
the Court so long, but I hope the great tm-
portance of the .occasion' will be ao^ted as
ny apology^— You are topionounce upon this
important eate :> I leave it thus with you, and
I am confident you will give it a g^ve, adL
lemOy and dispissionate eonsidention. lay*
ing aside every thing but the evidence
produced in the cause, and the fidr bearing of
it upon the sulject in question : and I hmTo
not the least doubt, but the verdict you will
give, I will be that which you will remember
with comfort and saUsftiction to the lueat
hour of your lives.

[Die rcmoiiMfer ffihi$ IWcl hegm^foi. xjrvti.]

prfoctples were the' same. The paper you
have Drought, admits 4iey are our enemies.—
Tou*are the same.-^What would then have
been the consequence to Mr: Ot>»onor ? All
tlM^he would have got by his errand would
have been, to have exchanged the Castle of
Dublin, for the Temple of France— there to
have remained a degiaded and miserable prr-
soner, without hooe of redemption He is
then supposed to nave risked his life, and
cast off all his friends, to embark in a perilous
and dissraceful business, with a double string
to his DOW (if I may use the expression),
doubly insuring his destraotion. If he is dis-
covered 1^ the English covemment, he is
tried, as a traitor, for his life at Maklstooe, for
being the bearerof this paper, and if he pre-
sents it to the Executive Directory, he is shut
up in a prison^ if not guillotined, In France,
lor the description it contains of the public
principles of his confidential friends, and coii-
aequentlyof himself, aOd condemned, upon
his ewn showingi as an enemy, instead of a

END OP VOL. XXVI,

tt

Maud by T. C. BMHud, PMoboieagh-Coait,
Reet-StratttLoadm.

I